IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2017
THE HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.4889 OF 2017
1. SRI KOTRESH D.L.,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS.
2. SRI LAKSHMAN
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS.
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.
PETITIONERS NO.1 TO 3
ARE RESIDING AT 1ST CROSS,
1ST MAIN, K.R.NAGAR,
DISTRICT – 577 601.
4. SMT. SHEELA @ JYOTHI
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
R/O 6TH CROSS,
1ST MAIN, MARUTHI NAGAR,
RANEBENNUR, HAVERI DISTRICT – 581 115.
5. SMT. ROHINI
W/O NAVEEN KUMAR T.
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
R/AT NO 17-2-160B,
DHANU BASAPPA STREET,
ANDHRA PRADESH – 515 865.
(By Sri MOHANKUMAR.D., ADVOCATE)
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
HARIHARA TOWN POLICE STATION,
HARIHARA, DAVANAGERE – 577 601.
REPRESENTED BY ITS S.P.P,
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT BUILDINGS,
HIGH COURT, BENGALURU – 01.
W/O KOTRESH D.L.,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
R/AT 1ST CROSS,
1ST MAIN, K.R.NAGAR, HARIHARA,
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT – 577 601.
(By Sri SANDESH J.CHOUTA, SPP-II FOR R1)
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO
QUASH THE FIR AND ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CRIME
NO.53/2017 PENDING ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL
CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., HARIHARA FOR THE
ALLEGED OFENCES P/U/S 3 AND 4 OF D.P.ACT, 1961
AND SECTIONS 504, 498A, 323, 149 OF IPC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.
Perused the First Information Report in Cr.No.53/2017
on the file of the Respondent Police, i.e., Harihara Town
Police Station, Davanagere District, registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the
Dowry Prohibition Act and also under Sections 504,
498A, 32 and 149 of IPC.
2. Though there are no details in the FIR about
the specific overt acts of the petitioners, however, there
are allegations against them also that they have been
ill-treating and harassing the petitioner in matrimonial
home. Therefore, it is too pre-mature stage to quash
the FIR itself when there are some semblance of
3. At this stage, the learned SPP submits that
the police after thorough investigation have already
filed charge-sheet in No.39/2017 dated 27.05.2017.
4. In view of the above said submission, the
learned counsel seeks permission to withdraw the
petition with a liberty to file fresh petition, if advised.
The submission of the learned counsel for the
petitioner is recorded. Petition is dismissed as
withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.
In view of the dismissal of the petition, I.A.No.1 of
2017 does not survive for consideration and