SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Amulkumar And Ors vs The State Through And Anr on 21 February, 2024

Take notes as you read a judgment using our Virtual Legal Assistant and get email alerts whenever a new judgment matches your query (Query Alert Service). Try out our Premium Member services — Free for one month.

Karnataka High Court

Amulkumar And Ors vs The State Through And Anr on 21 February, 2024

Author: Rajendra Badamikar

Bench: Rajendra Badamikar

-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1673
CRL.P No.201680 of 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

KALABURAGI BENCH

DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024

BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.201680 OF 2023 (482)
BETWEEN:

1. AMULKUMAR S/O VIDYACHAND BABLAD,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCC: PVT. SERVICE,
R/O VIJAYANAGAR, ALAND ROAD,
KALABURAGI,
DIST. AND TQ. KALABURAGI-585104.

2. VINODKUMAR S/O VIDYACHAND BABLAD,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCC: PVT. SERVICE,
R/O VIJAYANAGAR, ALAND ROAD, KALABURAGI,
NOW RESIDING AT PUNE PIN CODE-585104.

3. REKHA W/O VINODKUMAR BABLAD,
Digitally signed by
SHILPA R AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCC: PVT. SERVICE,
TENIHALLI R/O VIJAYANAGAR, ALAND ROAD, KALABURAGI,
Location: HIGH NOW RESIDING AT PUNE PIN CODE-585104.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI BHARAMAGOUDA K. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE THROUGH
MAHILA P.S.,
TQ. ALAND, DIST. KALABURAGI,
REPRESENTED BY, ADDL. SPP,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1673
CRL.P No.201680 of 2023

BENCH AT KALABURAGI-585102.

2. VIDYASHREE W/O AMULKUMAR BABLAD
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE,
R/O HATTALLI,
TQ. INDI, DIST. VIJAYAPURA-586205.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. ANITA M. REDDY HCGP FOR R1;
SRI SACHIN M. MAHAJAN, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO
EXERCISE ITS INHERENT POWERS AND JURISDICTION U/S 482
OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, TO QUASH THE
PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.15642/2022 PENDING ON THE FILE
OF I ADDITIONAL J.M.F.C. AT KALABURAGI FOR THE ALLEGED
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SEC. 498A, 323, 504, 506 R/W 34
OF
IPC AND SECTIONS 3 AND 4 OF D.P. ACT IN CRIME
NO.09/2021 OF MAHILA P.S. KALABURAGI, AGAINST THE
PETITIONERS TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND TO
PREVENT THE ABUSE OF PROCESS OF LAW

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

ORDER

The petitioners have filed this petition under Section

482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the proceedings pending on

the file of I Additional JMFC, Kalaburagi in

C.C.No.15642/2022, arising out of Crime No.9/2021 of

Mahila Police Station, Kalaburagi registered for the
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1673
CRL.P No.201680 of 2023

offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506

read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short,

IPC’) as well as Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition

Act (for short, ‘the DP Act’)

2. The brief factual matrix leading to the case are

that:

The marriage of petitioner No.1 was solemnized with

the complainant on 10.01.2019 and sufficient dowry was

paid in the form of cash and gold. It is also alleged that

certain amount was transferred to the account of accused

No.1 by bank transfer. However, the petitioners started

to harass the complainant demanding additional dowry

and hence, she was compelled to file a complaint in this

regard.

3. On the basis of the complaint, a crime was

registered and subsequently, the Investigating Officer

after investigation submitted the charge-sheet against the

accused.

-4-

NC: 2024:KHC-K:1673
CRL.P No.201680 of 2023

4. Being aggrieved by the submission of the

charge-sheet and taking cognizance, the petitioners are

before this Court by way of this petition.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners

and the learned High Court Government Pleader

appearing for respondent No.1/State as well as learned

counsel for respondent No.2.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioners would

contend that petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are residing

separately and the marriage is already dissolved and no

case is made for the offence under Section 498A of IPC.

He would contend that the statements of the witnesses

recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. run contrary to the

complaint allegations and hence, he would seek for

allowing the petition by quashing the proceedings.

7. Per contra, the learned High Court Government

Pleader appearing for respondent No.1/State and learned

counsel for respondent No.2 would support the order of
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1673
CRL.P No.201680 of 2023

the learned Magistrate in taking cognizance and issuing

process. They would contend that the evidence on record

disclose that the amount was transferred by way of cash

through bank transaction which is prima facie evident of

demand of dowry and payment of dowry and the

ingredients of offence under Section 498A of IPC is

directly applicable. They would further assert that the

statements recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. by the

Investigating Officer clearly disclose that all the

petitioners with common intention subjected the

complainant to mental and physical cruelty demanding

additional dowry and the genuineness of the statements

recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. cannot be gone into

at this juncture in a petition filed under Section 482 of

Cr.P.C. Hence, they would seek for rejection of the

petition.

8. Having heard the arguments and perusing the

records, it is an admitted fact that petitioner No.1 is the

husband of respondent No.2/complainant. Petitioner Nos.2
-6-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1673
CRL.P No.201680 of 2023

and 3 are the brother-in-law and sister-in-law of the

complainant. The allegations made in the complaint

disclose that there was demand of dowry and during the

marriage, sufficient amount of dowry was paid in the form

of cash and gold. Prima facie the records disclose that

certain amount has been transferred by way of Bank

account also.

9. The statements of the witnesses disclose that

petitioner Nos.2 and 3 have joined the hands with

petitioner No.1 in demanding the dowry and subjecting

the complainant to ill-treatment. Though the learned

counsel for the petitioners would contend that the

statements recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. run

contrary to the complaint allegations, they cannot be

looked into at this juncture and are required to be tested

only during the course of the trial. The statements of the

witnesses recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. as well

as the complaint allegations clearly disclose that even

petitioner Nos.2 and 3 have subjected the
-7-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1673
CRL.P No.201680 of 2023

victim/complainant to ill-treatment. Apart from that, the

certified copy of the order sheet discloses that all along

the petitioners have remained absent before the Trial

Court and some time warrants came to be issued and

some time, exemption petitions came to be filed which

has resulted in protracting the matter, though the matter

is pending since 2022. The certified copy of the order

sheet discloses that all along the exemption petitions were

regularly filed and that will also clearly discloses the

intention of the petitioners. In view of these facts and

circumstances, this case does not fall under the

exceptions as provided in AIR 2021 SCC 1918 [M/s.

Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., vs. State of

Maharashtra and Others] so as to quash the

proceedings. The remedy for the petitioners is to

substantiate their defence in the Trial Court itself. Hence,

the petition being devoid of any merits, does not survive

for consideration and accordingly, I proceed to pass the

following:

-8-

NC: 2024:KHC-K:1673
CRL.P No.201680 of 2023

ORDER

The petition stands dismissed with costs of

Rs.2,000/-.

In view of disposal of the petition, I.A.No.1/2023 filed

for stay does not survive for consideration and accordingly

stands disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE

RSP
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine


All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

Recent Comments

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2024 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation