PRAJWAL C. v. KISHORE C.

(BY SRI. CHANDAN B. K., ADVOCATE) AND:

#1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY RMC YARD POLICE STATION, - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC:3501 CRL.P No. 8453 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 8239 of 2023 HC-KAR REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, BANGALORE DISTRICT, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BENGALURU – 560 009.

#2. SMT. PRAMEELA B., W/O S.KRISHNA, D/O BORALINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/AT NO.805, 3RD CROSS, 3RD MAIN, SRS ROAD, PEENYA BENGALURU NORTH, PEENYA INDUSTRIES, BENGALURU – 560 058. (BY SRI. VINAY MAHADEVAIAH, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. VIVEK, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. ABHINAV R., ADVOCATE FOR R2) …RESPONDENTS THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.126/2023 REGISTERED AGAINST THE PETITIONERS HEREIN FOR OFFENCES P/U/S 498A, 307, 323, 504, 506, 324, 34 OF IPC, REGISTERED BY RMC YARD P.S., PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE 9TH ADDL. CMM COURT, BANGALORE CITY AT ANNEUXRE-A. IN CRL.P NO. 8239/2023 BETWEEN:

#1. RAJANNA, SON OF LATE BORLINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:3501 CRL.P No. 8453 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 8239 of 2023 HC-KAR

#2. S.LAKSHMIDEVI, WIFE OF RAJANNA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,

#3. S.PADMAVATHI, WIFE OF LATE CHANDRASHEKHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT NO.822, 3RD MAIN ROAD, 3RD CROSS, BEHIND GOVT. COLLEGE, SRS ROAD, PEENYA, BANGALORE NORTH, PEENYA SMALL INDUSTRIES, KARNATAKA – 560 058. (BY SRI. CHANDAN B. K., ADVOCATE) AND:

#1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY RMC YARD POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, BANGALORE DISTRICT, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BENGALURU - 560 009.

#2. SMT. B.PRAMEELA, W/O S.KRISHNA, D/O BORALINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/AT NO.805 , 3RD MAIN ROAD, 3RD CROSS, BEHIND GOVT. COLLEGE, SRS ROAD, PEENYA, BANGALORE NORTH, ...PETITIONERS - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:3501 CRL.P No. 8453 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 8239 of 2023 HC-KAR PEENYA INDUSTRIES, BENGALURU – 560 058. (BY SRI. VINAY MAHADEVAIAH, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. VIVEK, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. ABHINAV R., ADVOCATE FOR R2) ...RESPONDENTS PETITIONER HEREIN THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.126/2023 REGISTERED AGAINST THE 498-A, 307, 323, 504, 506, 324, 34 OF IPC REGISTERED BY RMC YARD P.S., PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE 9tH ADDITIONAL CMM COURT, BENGALURU CITY AT ANNEXURE A. FOR OFFENCE P/U/S THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER These petitions are preferred by accused Nos.3 and 4 in Crl.P.No.8239/2023 accused Nos.6 7 Crl.P.No.8453/2023, are before this Court seeking quashment of the FIR in Crime No.126/2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 307, 504, 506, 323, 324, 34 of the IPC, registered by RMC Yard PS., pending on the file of 9th Addl. - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC:3501 CRL.P No. 8453 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 8239 of 2023 HC-KAR CMM Court, Bangalore City. Accused No.5-Smt.S.Padmavathi is no more. Therefore, Crl.P.No.8239/2023 preferred by accused No.5 stands abated.

#2. Heard Sri. Chandan B.K. learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri. Vinay Mahadevaiah, learned HCGP appearing for respondent No.1, Sri. Vivek, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 and have perused the material on record.

#3. The 2nd respondent is the complainant W/o one Krishna S, who is accused No.1 in Crime No.126/2023. Accused No.1 and respondent No.2 get married in the year 2009 and the relationship having floundered between the two, the wife has registered several crimes against all the members of the family of the husband as the case would be, both under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. The present proceedings form the crime in Crime No.126/2023. Accused No.4 is the sister-in-law of the complainant and accused No.3 is the husband of accused No.4. The allegations are the ones - 6 - NC: 2026:KHC:3501 CRL.P No. 8453 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 8239 of 2023 HC-KAR punishable under Sections 498A, 307, 504, 506, 323 and 324 of the IPC. The complaint has triggered registration of the crime. Therefore, I deem it appropriate to notice the complaint in its entirety. The complaint reads as follows: “ರವ(cid:4)(cid:5)ೆ, (cid:9)(cid:10)ಾಂಕ: 30.07.2023 ಇ(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:17)ೇಕ(cid:19)(cid:20) ಆ(cid:22) (cid:23)(cid:24)ೕ(cid:25), ಆ(cid:20).ಎಂ.(cid:27). (cid:28)ಾ(cid:29)(cid:30) (cid:23)(cid:24)ೕ(cid:25) (cid:31)ಾ ೆ, !ೆಂಗಳ$ರು. ಇಂದ. ಪ()ೕಳ *., ,ೋಂ ಎ(cid:25) ಕೃಷ0, ವಯಸು(cid:16) 37 ವಷ(cid:30), ನಂ.805, 3(cid:10)ೇ ,ಾ((cid:25) 3(cid:10)ೇ 4ೖ(cid:15), ಎ(cid:25).ಆ(cid:20).ಎ(cid:25) ರ6ೆ7, 8ೕಣ:, !ೆಂಗಳ$ರು. ;!ೈ< : 97411 41243 =ಾನ:>ೆ ?ಷಯ : ಎ(cid:25). ಕೃಷ0 ಮತು7 ಅವನ ತಮC Dಾ:E ಸುಂದ(cid:20), =ಾವ >ಾಜಣ0 ಮತು7 ಅವರ GೆಂಡI ಲKLMೇ?, ಪMಾCವI, ಪ(ಜN< ಮತು7 ODೆPೕ(cid:20) ಇವ>ೆಲQರೂ 6ೇ(cid:4) ನನR 4ೕSೆ MೈTಕ ಹSೆQ =ಾV ಅWಾ:ಚ: ಶಬ[ಗ\ಂದ ನನR (cid:10)ಾಧ^ಯವ>ಾದ ಪದCವI. ಲKLMೇ? ತSೆ TVದು ಎ_ೆMಾV ಮುಖ,ೆa ತSೆ(cid:5)ೆ Gೊbೆದು, ,ಾ(cid:24)^ಂದ ಓದು[ ಮತು7 ನನR ಗಂಡ ಎ(cid:25). ಕೃಷ0 ರವರು ಮರದ Mೊ ೆ0dಂದ eೊbೆ(cid:5)ೆ, !ೆ^R(cid:5)ೆ 6ಾಯುವ (cid:4)ೕI Gೊbೆದು (cid:17)ಾ(ಣ eೆ(cid:5)ೆಯಲು ಪ(ಯತR ಪಟು(cid:19) ಮ(cid:10)ೆdಂದ Gೊರ(cid:5)ೆ Gಾಕಲು ಸಂಚು =ಾV ,ೊSೆ !ೆದ(cid:4),ೆ GಾOರುವ ಬ(cid:5)ೆg ದೂರು. - 7 - NC: 2026:KHC:3501 CRL.P No. 8453 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 8239 of 2023 HC-KAR ಈ 4ೕಲaಂಡ ?ಷಯ,ೆa ಸಂಬಂi(cid:27)ದಂeೆ ನನR ಗಂಡ(cid:10)ಾದ ಎ(cid:25). ಕೃಷ0 ಮತು7 ಅವರ ಅಕaಂ(cid:9)>ಾದ ಪMಾCವI, ಲKLMೇ?, ತಮC Dಾ:ಂಸುಂದ(cid:20) Gಾಗೂ >ಾಜಣ0, ಪ(ಜN< ಮತು7 ODೆPೕ(cid:20) ಇವ>ೆಲQರೂ ಒಂದುಗೂV.(cid:9)(cid:10)ಾಂಕ 27.07.2023 gÀAzÀÄ ¨É½UÉÎ 7.00 UÀAmÉ ¸ÀªÀÄAiÀÄzÀ°è ªÀÄ£ÉUÉ £ÀÄVÎ ಬಂದು ನನR (cid:10)ಾದ^ಯ>ಾದ ಪMಾCವI ಮತು7 ಲKLMೇ? ನನR ಗಂಡ ಎ(cid:25). 'ಕೃಷ0, >ಾಜಣ0 Dಾ:ಂಸುದ(cid:20) Gಾಗೂ ಪMಾCವIಯ ಮಗ(cid:10)ಾದ ಪ(ಜN< ರವರು ಏ,ಾಏO ಒಳ(cid:5)ೆ ಬಂದು ಮ(cid:10)ೆ lಾ(cid:24) =ಾV Gೊದುವಂeೆ ಮತು7 ಕೃಷ0^(cid:5)ೆ bೈವ(cid:25)(cid:30) ,ೊಡು ಎಂದು ಒeಾ7ಯ =ಾVದು[, ಅದನುR ^>ಾಕ(cid:4)(cid:27)ದ[,ೆa ನನR (cid:10)ಾದ^ಯ>ಾದ ಪದ:ವI ಮತು7 ಲKLMೇ? ನನR ಜುಟ(cid:19)ನುR TVದು. ಎ_ೆMಾVದು[, ಆ ಸಮಯದ(cid:24)Q ನನR ಗಂಡ ಕೃಷ0 ಮತು7 ಅವನ ತªÀÄä Dಾ:ಂಸುದ(cid:20) ನನRನುR ,ಾ(cid:24)^ಂದ ಒದು[ ,ೆಳ(cid:5)ೆ *\(cid:27)ದು[, ಆಗ >ಾಜಣ0ನವರು ಈ ಮುಂbೆಯನುR 6ಾdಸು ಎಂದು ಕುಮCಕುa ,ೊmಾ(cid:19)ಗ ಪ(ಜN< ಎಂಬುವವನು ,ೋn(cid:30)ನ(cid:24)Q (cid:10)ಾನು (cid:10)ೋV,ೊಳopeೆ7ೕ(cid:10)ೆ. Gೊರ(cid:5)ೆ GಾO ಅವಳನುR ಎಂದು Gೇ\ದು[, ಆಗ ಆ ಸಮಯದ(cid:24)Q ನನR ಗಂಡ ಎ(cid:25). ಕೃಷ0ನು ಪ(qೋದ(cid:10)ೆ(cid:5)ೊಂಡು ಒಂದು Mೊ ೆ0ಯನುR ತಂದು ^ನRನುR 6ಾdಸುeೆ7ೕ(cid:10)ೆ ಎಂದು ಮನಬಂದಂeೆ Mೊ ೆ0dಂದ ,ೈ, ,ಾಲು, eೊbೆ, !ೆನುR ಎSಾQ ಕbೆ 6ಾಯುವ (cid:4)ೕI Gೊbೆದು (cid:10)ಾನು ,ೆಳ(cid:5)ೆ *ದ[ ನಂತರ ಮeೊ74C ಎಲQರೂ ನನRನುR ಒ!ೊrಬr>ಾs ,ಾ(cid:24)^ಂದ ಮತು7 ನನR ಗಂಡ ಮeೊ74C Mೊ ೆ0dಂದ ನನR eೊbೆ(cid:5)ೆ ಒbೆ(cid:9)ದು[, ನನ(cid:5)ೆ ಈಗ ಎSಾQ ಕbೆ Iೕವ(Wಾs ಒಳ(cid:17)ೆಟು(cid:19) *(cid:9)[ದು[ ಓbಾಡಲು ಕೂಡ eೊಂದ>ೆ(cid:28)ಾsMೆ Gಾಗೂ ನನR ಗಂಡ ನನR (cid:10)ಾದ^ಯವರು ಎಲQರೂ 6ೇ(cid:4) ದರದರ(cid:10)ೆ ಮ(cid:10)ೆಯ ಒಳsಂದ !ಾs(cid:24)ನ ತನಕ ಎ_ೆದು,ೊಂಡು ಬಂದು GಾOರುeಾ7>ೆ. ಮರ(cid:9)ಂದ Gೊbೆದ ,ಾರಣ ನನR ಕತು7, ,ಾಲು, eೊbೆಗ\(cid:5)ೆ ಒbೆದ ,ಾರಣ ರಕ7 Gೆಪtuಗಟು(cid:19)ವಂeೆ ಒbೆ(cid:9)ರುeಾ7>ೆ. Gಾಗೂ ತುn(cid:5)ೆ. ಒbೆMಾಗ ರಕ7 ಬಂ(cid:9)ದು[ ಇರುತ7Mೆ. ಇದ,ೆa ಸಂಬಂi(cid:27)ದಂeೆ ಅMೇ (cid:9)ನ (cid:10)ಾನು ,ೆ.(cid:27). ಜನರ< ಆಸueೆ((cid:5)ೆ Gೋs vOeೆ(cid:16) ಪbೆ(cid:9)ದು[, ಇದನುR ಸಂಬಂಧಪಟ(cid:19) ^ಮC (cid:31)ಾ ೆ(cid:5)ೆ (cid:4)ಪw(cid:30)xð ಅನುR ಕ\T(cid:27)ರುeಾ7>ೆ. ಇದ,ೆa ಮುಂqೆ Tಂ(cid:9)ನ (cid:9)ನ (cid:10)ಾನು (cid:5)ೋiಯನುR ಒಣsGಾOದು[, ಅದ,ೆa ನನR ಗಂಡ ಎ(cid:25). ಕೃಷ0 ಮತು7 Dಾ:ಂಸುದ(cid:20) ಇಬrರು ನನR ಎದು(cid:4)(cid:5)ೆ ಮೂತ( ?ಷಜ(cid:30)(cid:10)ೆ =ಾV. ಇದನುR =ಾV IನುR ಎಂದು ಮತು7 ಕ(cid:17)ಾಳ,ೆa Gೊbೆ(cid:9)ರುeಾ7>ೆ ಮತು7 ಅMೇ (cid:9)ನ ನನR ಮಗಳo ?Gಾ ಅವಳo (cid:10)ಾಲa(cid:10)ೆ ತರಗIಯ(cid:24)Q ಓದುI7ದು[, DಾSೆಯ(cid:24)Q (cid:17)ಾ(yೆz(cid:19) ವಕ(cid:30) ಅಂದ>ೆ >ಾs, ಬತ7, ಕಡSೆ ,ಾd *ೕಜ, Gೆಸರು ,ಾಳo ಮತು7 4ಂeೆ: !ೆ_ೆ(cid:27),ೊಂಡು ಬರಲು I\(cid:27)ದು[, ಅದನುR ಮ(cid:10)ೆಯ(cid:24)Qಟು(cid:19) !ೆ_ೆಸಲು =ಾVದು[, ಅದು ;ಳ,ೆ Gೊbೆ(cid:9)ದು[ ಅದನುR ಸೂa(cid:24)(cid:5)ೆ eೆ(cid:5)ೆದು,ೊಂಡು Gೋಗಲು =ಾರ(cid:10)ೇ (cid:9)ನ !ೆ\(cid:5)ೆg ಆqೆ ಬಂMಾಗ ನನR ಗಂಡ ಎ(cid:25). ಕೃಷ0 ಮತು7 Dಾ:ಂಸುದ(cid:20) ಅದನುR (cid:10)ಾಶ =ಾV ,ಾ(cid:24)^ಂದ GೊಸO GಾOದು[ ಇರುತ7Mೆ. Gಾಗೂ (cid:10)ಾನು ಮ(cid:10)ೆಯ(cid:24)Q ಮಲsMಾ[ಗ ನನ(cid:5)ೆ (cid:5)ೊeಾ7ಗದ Gಾ(cid:5)ೆ ಮಲಗುವ ,ೊಟ(cid:19)V(cid:5)ೆ ^ೕರು ಸು(cid:4)(cid:9)ದು[ Gಾಗೂ ಅV(cid:5)ೆ =ಾVದ[ನುR ,ೆಳ,ೆa ದ©â ಅಡು(cid:5)ೆಯನುR (cid:10)ಾಶ =ಾV, ನನR - 8 - NC: 2026:KHC:3501 CRL.P No. 8453 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 8239 of 2023 HC-KAR ತಂMೆಯವರು ನನ(cid:5)ೆ ಅಡು(cid:5)ೆ =ಾಡಲು 6ಾ=ಾನು ,ೊV(cid:27)ದು[, ಅದನುR ಸಹ eೆ(cid:5)ೆದು,ೊಂಡು Gೋsರುeಾ7>ೆ. ಅದು ಅಲQMೆ ನನR >ೇಷ(cid:15) ,ಾ(cid:29)(cid:30) ಅನುR ಸಹ eೆ(cid:5)ೆದು,ೊಂಡು Gೋsರುeಾ7>ೆ. ,ೆಲ{4C ^ೕ(cid:4)ನ(cid:24)Q ,ಾರದ ಪtV Gಾಕುವtದು, ^ೕ(cid:4)ನ(cid:24)Q !ೇ>ೆ !ೇ>ೆ(cid:28)ಾದ ವಸು7ಗಳನುR ಸಹ GಾO ^ೕರು ಕುVಯಲು ಸಹ eೊಂದ>ೆ =ಾಡುI7ರುeಾ7>ೆ. ಈ TಂMೆ ಇವರ 4ೕSೆ ವರದ| ೆ ಮತು7 Oರುಕುಳ,ೆa ಸಂಬಂi(cid:27)ದಂeೆ ^ಮC (cid:31)ಾ ೆಯ(cid:24)Q ಹಲWಾರು }ಾ(cid:4) ದೂರು ^ೕVದು[, ತದನಂತರ ,ೆ~ಂ ನಂ.93/2022 ಇದರ(cid:24)Q 4ೕSೆ Gೇ\ದ ವ:O7ಗಳ 4ೕSೆ PÉøÀ£ÀÄß zÁR®Ä =ಾVದು[ !ೇ< eೆ(cid:5)ೆದು,ೊಂVರುeಾ7>ೆ Gಾಗೂ ನನ(cid:5)ೆ eೊರದ>ೆ,ೊಡ!ಾರMೆಂದು ಮತು7 ನನ(cid:5)ೆ (cid:127)ೕವ(cid:10)ೋ(cid:17)ಾಯ(cid:24)Q (cid:28)ಾವtMೇ Mಾ(cid:4) ಇರುವt(cid:9)<ಲ Gಾಗೂ (cid:10)ಾನು ಎಲೂQ ,ೆಲಸ,ೆa GೋಗುI7ಲQ, Gಾಗೂ ನನ(cid:5)ೆ 4ೕ(cid:15)mÉÃ(cid:10)ೆ(cid:15)(cid:16) ,ೊಡ!ೇ,ೆಂದು (cid:10)ಾ:(cid:28)ಾಲಯದ(cid:24)Q MಾವವನುR ಸಹ GಾOರುeೆ7ೕ(cid:10)ೆ. ಈ ಎರಡು ಪ(ಕರಣಗಳ 4ೕSೆ =ಾನ: ಉಚ(cid:129) (cid:10)ಾ:(cid:28)ಾಲಯದ(cid:24)Q 4ೕSೆ Gೇ\ದ ವ:O7ಗಳo ಕ()ನ< 8nಷ(cid:15) £ÀA.8720/2022 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ Qæ«Ä£À¯ï ¦nµÀ£ï £ÀA.1707/2022 zÁR®Ä =ಾV ತbೆ(cid:28)ಾ(cid:130)ೆ ತಂದು, ಈಗ (cid:10)ಾವt ತbೆ(cid:28)ಾ(cid:130)ೆ ತಂ(cid:9)Mೆ[ೕWೆ. ^ೕನು ಏನು =ಾಡಲು Gಾಗುವt(cid:9)ಲQ Gಾಗೂ ಪ(ಜN< ಎಂಬ ಹುಡುಗನು (cid:10)ಾನು Sಾಯ(cid:20) ಇMೆ[ೕ(cid:10)ೆ. ಏನು =ಾಡಲು Gಾಗುವt(cid:9)ಲQWೆಂದು !ೆದ(cid:4),ೆ GಾOರುeಾ7>ೆ. ಈ ಎSಾQ. ,ಾರಣಗ\ಂದ ನನRನುR ಮತು7 ನನR ಮಗಳನುR (cid:28)ಾವ ಸಮಯದ(cid:24)Q !ೇ,ಾದರೂ ನಮCನುR 6ಾdಸಬಹುದು, ಆದುದ(cid:4)ಂದ 4ೕSೆ Gೇ\ದ ವ:O7ಗಳ 4ೕSೆ ಸೂಕ7 ,ಾನೂನು ಕ(ಮ eೆ(cid:5)ೆದು,ೊಂಡ ನನ(cid:5)ೆ ಮತು7 ನನR ಮಗ\(cid:5)ೆ ಸೂಕ7 ರ| ೆ ,ೊಡ!ೇ,ೆಂದು ತಮC(cid:24)Q ,ೆ\,ೊಳopeೆ7ೕ(cid:10)ೆ. ಈ 8(cid:28)ಾ(cid:30)ದು 'yೋeೆ (cid:10)ಾನು ,ೆ.(cid:27). ಜನರ< ಆಸueೆ(ಯ(cid:24)Q vOeೆ(cid:16) ಪbೆದ MಾಖSಾI ಮತು7 ನನ(cid:5)ೆ ಬಲWಾs Gೊbೆ(cid:9)ದು[, (cid:5)ಾಯದ ಬ(cid:5)ೆg (cid:17)ೇ(cid:15)bೈ(cid:131) ಕೂಡ ಈ 8gÁåದು yೊeೆ ಲಗI7(cid:27)ರುeೆ7ೕ(cid:10)ೆ. ನನ(cid:5)ೆ (cid:17)ಾ(ಣ ಭಯ ಇದು[ದ(cid:4)ಂದ ಮತು7 ನನ(cid:5)ೆ ತುಂ!ಾ =ಾನ(cid:27)ಕWಾs ಕುsg Gೋsದು[ Gಾಗೂ ಓbಾಡಲು ಕೂಡ Gಾಗದ ,ಾರಣ (cid:10)ಾನು ತಡWಾs ಬಂದು ದೂರು ಸ(cid:24)QಸುI7Mೆ[ೕ(cid:10)ೆ. ವಂದ(cid:10)ೆಗ_ೆ$ಂ(cid:9)(cid:5)ೆ. ಸT/-.”

#4. In Crl.P.No.8453/2023, against the petitioners- accused Nos.6 and 7, there are no direct overt acts committed, that would become the offence under Section 498A or 307 of - 9 - NC: 2026:KHC:3501 CRL.P No. 8453 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 8239 of 2023 HC-KAR IPC. In Crl.P.No.8239/2023, against the petitioners-accused Nos.3 and 4, there are no direct overt acts committed, that would become the offence under Section 498A or 307 of IPC. In Crl.P.No.8453/2023, the 1st petitioner-accused No.6 is said to be a practicing advocate who has only threatened that whatever the complainant does, he would get a stay from the hands of the concerned court and has already taken stay in two of the matters. Therefore, the allegation is that he has instigated the behaviour of accused Nos.1 and 2 in a particular manner. Except the aforesaid narration, the complaint does not narrate any circumstance that can become an offence under Section 498A or 307 of IPC. Therefore, permitting further proceedings against these petitioners would undoubtedly run foul of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of MARAM NIRMALA v. STATE OF TELANGANA1, which reads as follows: “….. ….. …..

#12. The appellant(s) herein are the mother-in-law and father- in-law of respondent No. 2. They had filed a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking quashing of the proceedings instituted against them in C.C. No. 338/2023 pending on the file of the Judicial First Class 1 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2913 - 10 - NC: 2026:KHC:3501 CRL.P No. 8453 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 8239 of 2023 HC-KAR Magistrate (Prohibition and Excise offence) at Nalgonda alleging Sections 498- A, 323, 504 read with Section 34 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the DP Act. punishable offences

#13. By the impugned order, the said criminal petition has been disposed of reserving liberty to the appellant(s) herein to seek discharge in accordance with law. Hence, this appeal.

#14. The case at hand pertains to allegations of cruelty and dowry demand made by the respondent No. 2 against the appellant(s) herein. A bare perusal of the FIR however, shows that the allegations made by respondent No. 2 are vague and omnibus inasmuch as there is an absence of any specific instance or occasion detailed with particulars wherein the appellant(s) demanded dowry from respondent No. 2 and on refusal of the same, subjected her to mental and physical cruelty. The only allegations levelled by respondent No. 2 against the appellants herein are that subsequent to the birth of her daughter, the conduct of her husband underwent a change, which is stated to have been on account of the alleged inducement exercised by the in-laws including the appellant(s) herein for the purpose of demanding additional dowry and that pursuant to the counselling conducted at the Women Police Station, Nalgonda, although the husband of respondent No. 2 and his family assured that she would be they nevertheless continued to subject respondent No. 2 to mental and physical cruelty. treated properly,

#15. We therefore find that the aforesaid allegations levelled against the appellant(s), even if taken at their face value, do not prima facie disclose the commission of the alleged offences so as to warrant the initiation of criminal proceedings.

#16. During the course of submissions, learned counsel for the appellant(s) brought to our notice the judgment of this Court in the case of Dara Lakshmi Narayana v. State of Telangana, (2025) 3 SCC 735 (“Dara - 11 - NC: 2026:KHC:3501 CRL.P No. 8453 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 8239 of 2023 HC-KAR Lakshmi Narayana”) as well as other judgments which squarely apply to this case. We have perused the same.

#17. This Court speaking through one of us (B.V. Nagarathna, J.) in Dara Lakshmi Narayana, while dealing with the issue of quashing of criminal proceedings instituted by the respondent wife therein against her husband and in- laws who were charged with offences punishable under Sections 498A of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the DP Act, 1961, held as follows: sweeping dispute, without “27. A mere reference to the names of family members in a criminal case arising out of a matrimonial specific allegations indicating their active involvement should be nipped in the bud. It is a well- recognised fact, borne out of judicial experience, that there is often a tendency to implicate all the members of the husband's family when domestic disputes arise out of a matrimonial discord. Such accusations generalised unsupported particularised allegations cannot form the basis for criminal prosecution. Courts must exercise caution in such cases to prevent misuse of legal provisions and the legal process and avoid unnecessary harassment of family members. In the present case, Appellants 2 to 6, who are the members of the family of Appellant 1 have been living in different cities and have not resided in the matrimonial house of Appellant 1 and Respondent 2 herein. Hence, they cannot be dragged into criminal prosecution and the same would be an abuse of the process of the law in the absence of specific allegations made against each of them. evidence innocent concrete

#30. The inclusion of Section 498-A IPC by way of an amendment was intended to curb cruelty inflicted on a woman by her husband and his family, ensuring swift intervention by the State. However, in recent years, as there have been a notable rise in matrimonial disputes across the country, accompanied by growing discord and tension within the institution of there has been a marriage, consequently, growing tendency to misuse provisions - 12 - NC: 2026:KHC:3501 CRL.P No. 8453 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 8239 of 2023 HC-KAR Section 498-AIPC as a tool for unleashing personal vendetta against the husband and his family by a wife. Making vague and generalised allegations during matrimonial conflicts, if not scrutinised, will lead to the misuse of legal processes and an encouragement for use of arm twisting tactics by a wife and/or her family. Sometimes, recourse is taken to invoke Section 498-A IPC against the husband and his family in order to seek compliance with the unreasonable demands of a wife. Consequently, this Court has, time and again, cautioned against prosecuting the husband and his family in the absence of a clear prima facie case against them.

#31. We are not, for a moment, stating that any woman who has suffered cruelty in terms of what has been contemplated under Section 498-A IPC should remain silent and forbear herself from making a complaint or initiating any criminal proceeding. That is not the intention of our aforesaid observations but we should not encourage a case like as in the present one, where as a counterblast to the petition for dissolution of marriage sought by the first appellant, husband of the second respondent herein, a complaint under Section 498-A IPC is lodged by the latter. In fact, the insertion of the said provision is meant mainly for the protection of a woman who is subjected to cruelty in the matrimonial home primarily due to an unlawful demand for any property or valuable security in the form of dowry. However, sometimes it is misused as in the present case.

#34. We, therefore, are of the opinion that the impugned FIR No. 82 of 2022 filed by Respondent 2 was initiated with ulterior motives to settle personal scores and grudges against Appellant 1 and his family members i.e. Appellants 2 to 6 herein. Hence, the present case at hand falls within Category (7) of illustrative parameters highlighted in Bhajan Lal [State (1) SCC of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp 335 : 1992 SCC (Cri) 426]. Therefore, the High Court, in the present case, erred in not exercising the powers available to it under Section 482CrPC and thereby failed to prevent abuse of the Court's process by - 13 - NC: 2026:KHC:3501 CRL.P No. 8453 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 8239 of 2023 HC-KAR continuing appellants.” the criminal prosecution against (underlining by us)

#18. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case, we find that the judgment of this Court in Dara Lakshmi Narayana would apply. Hence, the impugned order of the High Court is set aside. The proceedings instituted against the appellant(s) in C.C. No. 338/2023 pending on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate (Prohibition and Excise offence) at Nalgonda stand quashed in relation to the appellants herein.” (Emphasis supplied)

#5. In that light, finding no ingredients that would permit even an investigation to be conducted against these petitioners, the petitions deserve to succeed and obliteration of the crime against accused Nos.3, 4, 6 and 7.

#6. It is made clear that the observations made in the case at hand would only be consideration of the case of the petitioners-accused Nos.3, 4, 6 and 7, it would not influence or bind the investigation qua other accused, if it is now continuing.

#7. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: O R D E R [I] Criminal Petitions are allowed. - 14 - NC: 2026:KHC:3501 CRL.P No. 8453 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 8239 of 2023 HC-KAR [II] In Criminal petition No.8239/2023, in so far as accused No.5 stands abated. Proceedings in respect of F.I.R. in Crime No.126/2023 pending before the 9th Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore City, qua accused Nos.3 and 4 stands quashed. [III] In Criminal Petition No.8453/2023, proceedings in respect of F.I.R. in Crime No.126/2023 pending before the 9th Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore City, qua accused Nos.6 and 7 stands quashed. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE CBC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23