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
