Sri Channa Veeregowda vs State Of Karnataka on 7 June, 2017

1

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JUNE 2017

BEFORE

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

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1162/2017

BETWEEN:

1. SRI CHANNA VEEREGOWDA
S/O DODDA VEEREGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
BSNL PHONE MECHANIC
R/AT SHANTHINAGAR
INFRONT OF IB K BETTAHALLI ROAD
PANDAVAPURA TOWN

2. SMT SARASWATHI
W/O CHANNA VEEREGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
HOUSE WIFE
R/AT SHANTINAGAR
INFRONT OF IB K BETTAHALLI ROAD,
PANDAVAPURA TOWN

3. SMT C N UMA
W/O B MURALIDHARA
AGED ABOUTG 37 YEARS,
HOUSE WIFE
R/AT NO.65/A, 6TH MAIN ROAD
KUVEMPU ROAD,
PRAMODA LAYOUT
BANGALORE-560003
2

PARENTAL HOUSE
SHATINAGAR
INFRONT OF IB, BETTAHALLI ROAD,
PANDAVAPURA TOWN

4. SMT N C SUMA
W/O K.C. KRISHNA
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
HOUSE WIFE
R/AT NO.31, 3RD CROSS,
ULLAL MAIN ROAD
BANGALORE-560056
PARENTAL HOUSE
SHATINAGAR INFRONT OF IB, BETTAHALLI
ROAD, PANDAVAPURA TOWN
… PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SHANTARADDI S MULIMANI, ADV.)

AND

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY PANDAVAPURA POLICE STATION,
MANDYA REP BY
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT
BANGALORE-560 001

2. SMT. C.S. PARIMALA
D/O SWAMYGOWDA
R/AT KYATANAHALLI VILLAGE
PANDAVAPURA TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT
… RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SANDESH J CHOUTA, SPP -II)

CRL.P FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH
THE FIR AND ENTIRE FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN CR.
NO.437/2011 IN C.C.NO.655/2012 FOR THE ALLEGED
3

OFFENCE P/U/S 498A,506,406 R/W 34 OF IPC AND
SEC.3,4 AND 6 OF D.P.ACT ON THE FILE OF JR. C.J.
AND J.M.F.C., PANDAVAPURA.

THIS CRIMINAL 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 for quashing of the

READ  X (Assumed Name) vs State & Anr. on 16 August, 2017

criminal case in C.C.No.655/2012 pending on the file of

Civil Judge and JMFC, Pandavapura arising out of Crime

No.437/2011 for the offences punishable under Sections

498A, 506, 406, read with 34 of IPC and also Sections 3,

4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. Brief factual matrix of the case is that

respondent No.2 herein and accused No.1 are the

husband and wife. Their marriage took place on

9.12.2004. There are some allegations with regard to

demand of dowry and receipt of dowry at the time of
4

marriage and further demand of dowry after marriage.

There are also certain allegations with regard to ill

treatment and harassment for the purpose of extracting

more dowry from respondent No.2 and her family

members. On such allegations, the police have

thoroughly investigated the matter and filed charge

sheet. Petitioners who are arraigned as accused Nos.2 to

5 have also appeared before the trial court and contested

the matter. Infact, they allowed the trial court to frame

charges and to post the matter for trial. The trial court

after hearing the parties has framed charges for the said

offences and set down the case for evidence. The order

sheet also discloses that the trial court also issued

summons to secure the witness for examination. At this

juncture, the present application is filed.

4. When the charges are already framed by the

court and the said order is not challenged by the

petitioners herein and when the mater is set down for
5

recording evidence and charge sheet papers disclose the

READ  P.Kavia vs State Rep. By on 27 March, 2017

allegations constituting the offence, the trial court has to

conclude the trial after recording the evidence and at this

stage, such proceedings cannot be quashed.

5. Under the above circumstances, I proceed to

pass the following order:

Order

The petition is dismissed. However, as the matter is

pertaining to 2012, the trial court is directed to take up

the matter and dispose of the same as expeditiously as

possible.

Sd/-

JUDGE

DM

Leave a Comment

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