IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2018
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K. N. PHANEENDRA
CRL.P. NO. 376/2018
AGED 59 YEARS,
2. SMT INDIRA
AGED 54 YEARS
AGED 31 YEARS
ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF
KUSHAL NAGAR, HASSAN
HASSAN DISTIRCT-573 201
AGED 51 YEARS
R/AT KATTIHALLI KOPPLU
SUBHASH NAGAR, HASSAN
HASSAN DISTIRCT-573 201 … PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. MAHESH C. M., ADVOCATE)
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY HASSAN WOMEN POLICE STATION
HASSAN, REP. BY THE STATE
HIGH COURT BUILDING
2. SMT MEGHANA B N
AGED 22 YEARS, B T KOPPALU
KASABA HOBLI, HASSAN
HASSAN DISTRICT-573 201 … RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S. RACHAIAH, HCGP FOR R-1.
SRI. G. S. MURLIDHARA, ADV. FOR R-2)
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO
QUSHING THE FIR BEARING CR.NO.115/2017
REGISTERED WITH HASSAN WOMEN P.S., HASSAN U/Ss.
498A, 448, 114, 506, 34 OF IPC R/W 3, 4 OF D.P ACT
FILED IN THE COURT OF IV CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,
HASSAN, HASSAN DISTRICT.
THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ADMISSION ALONG
WITH IA NO.1/2018 FOR STAY THIS DAY, THE COURT
MADE THE FOLLOWING:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.
Perused the records.
2. The petition is filed seeking quashing of the
FIR in Crime No.115/2016 registered against the
petitioners by Hassan Women Police, Hassan City, for the
offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 448, 114, 506
r/w. 34 of IPC and also under Sections 3 4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act and now it is pending before the 4th Civil
Judge and JMFC, Hassan.
3. Though there is some delay in filing the FIR in
this case, on the ground of delay itself, the FIR cannot be
quashed when the allegations made in the FIR would
constitute offences alleged. Therefore, the truth or the
falsity of the allegations made in the FIR has to be
thrashed out and the delay in lodging the complaint has to
be tested, during the course of investigation. Therefore, I
do not find any strong reason to quash the FIR. Hence,
the petition is devoid of merit and the same is liable to be
dismissed. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
However, it is made clear that if any adverse report is
filed against the petitioners without any basis, they are
at liberty to approach this court once again.
4. In view of disposal of this case, the
application-IA No.1/2018 filed for stay, does not survive
for consideration. Accordingly, the said application stands