Sri. Heriyanna Shetty vs State Of Karnataka on 30 May, 2017

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF MAY, 2017

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5353/2016

BETWEEN

1. SRI. HERIYANNA SHETTY
@ S.H.SHETTY,
SON OF GOVINDA SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,

2. SMT. BHAVANI,
WIFE OF S. H. SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,

3. SMT. SUJATHA,
WIFE OF LATE B. PRADEEP SHETTY,
D/O. S. H. SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,

1 TO 3 ARE RESIDING AT
NO.7-48Z(1), 5TH CROSS,
BALAJI LAYOUT,
KANNAPADY VILLAGE POST,
KADEKAR, UDUPI,
KARNATAKA-576103.
… PETITIONERS

(By SRI. SRINIVAS M. KULKARNI, ADV.,)
2

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY CHANDRA LAYOUT
POLICE STATION,
BANGALORE-560040.

2. SMT. SHILIKA HEGDE,
WIFE OF N. SUKUMAR SHETTY,
D/O. RAMDAS HEGDE,
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
NO.B-207, 2ND FLOOR,
REAL HOUSE APARTMENTS,
ANJANAPURA,
BANGALORE-560108.
… RESPONDENTS
(By SRI. SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SPP-II FOR R.1,
SMT. SANDHYA, ADV. FOR R.2)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AS AGAINST THE
PETITIONERS IN C.C.NO.26812/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE
VIII ACMM, BANGALORE.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.

Perused the records.

2. This petition is filed seeking quashing of

the entire proceedings in C.C.No.26812/2015 on the file
3

of the VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,

Bengaluru.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners

seriously contends that daughter-in-law of petitioner

No.1 by name Shilika Hegde lodged a complaint for the

offences punishable under Section 498A of IPC and

Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. He

contends that the husband has issued a legal notice

calling upon her to come back and perform her

matrimonial obligations. Then only she ventured upon

to file complaint making false and reckless allegations

against her husband as well as petitioners. According

to him, compliant is filed in order to harass the

petitioners and her husband.

4. Of course, there is a legal notice issued

by the husband of respondent No.2 calling upon her to

go back to him to perform the matrimonial obligations.
4

In the complaint as could be seen, there are certain

allegations made with regard to demand of dowry as

well as ill-treatment and harassment. Whether those

allegations are true or false or sufficient to proceed

against the accused or not is to be tested by means of

analyzing the entire material on record. The Court

while exercising powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

cannot anticipate the pros and cons of the allegations.

The Court has to take as it is the allegations made in

the complaint on their face value to find out whether

they are sufficient to constitute any offence. As could be

seen from the complaint averments, there are certain

allegations of demand of dowry, ill-treatment and

harassment. The truth or falsity of the said allegations

have to be tested by the Trial Court itself.

5. Under the above said circumstances, I do

not find any strong reasons to quash the entire
5

proceedings at this stage. However, the petitioners are

at liberty to move the Trial Court by filing necessary

application for their discharge under Section 239 of

Cr.P.C. In that eventuality, the Trial Court has to

examine the materials available on record so far as

petitioners are concerned whether they are sufficient to

proceed against them for the purpose of framing of

charges.

With these observations, the petition is liable to

be dismissed. Accordingly, it is dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

PMR

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *