SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Parashiva M vs State Of Karnataka on 4 January, 2018

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 4th DAY OF JANUARY 2018

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE K N PHANEENDRA

CRIMINAL PETITION No.2495/2016

BETWEEN:

1. PARASHIVA M
S/O LATE MALLAIAH
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS.

2. PUTTANANJAMMA
W/O LATE MALLAIAH
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS

3. SMT THOYAJAKSHI
W/O RAGHU
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS.

4. RAGHU
S/O.. AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS.

ALL ARE RESIDING AT BACHENAHALLI VILLAGE
DASANADODDI POST
B G PURA HOBLI
MALAVALLI TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT – 571104. … PETITIONERS

(BY SRI LAKSHMIKANTH K, ADV)
2

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY
MALAVALLI RURAL POLICE STATION
MANDYA DISTRICT
REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BANGALORE – 01.

2. PARVATHAMMA
D/O DODDAMADAIAH
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.13,
AMBEDKAR NAGARA
KANAKAPURA
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT
BANGALORE – 87. … RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI SANDESH J CHOUTA, SPP-II FOR R.1,
SRI M PARTHASARATHY, ADV.FOR R.2)

THIS PETITION IS FILED U/S. 482 Cr.P.C.
PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR RGISTERED UNDER
SECTIONS 498A, 506 READ WITH 34 OF IPC AGAINST
THE PETITIONERS IN CR.NO.36/2016 PENDING ON
THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC
MALAVALLI, MANDYA DISTRICT.

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

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.

Perused the records.

3

2. A perusal of the First Information Report

indicates that there are allegations made that petitioner

no.1 is the husband of complainant Parvathamma and

their marriage took place on 12.11.2012 and they were

living together as husband and wife and she became

pregnant due to the relationship. It is alleged that the

accused persons have illtreated her and harassing her

and the petitioner-husband has been threatening to kill

her and the accused persons were also planning to

perform the marriage of the first petitioner with some

other girl. When she enquired with her husband, he

again threatened her with dire consequence of killing

her. On the basis of these allegations, the police have

registered a case.

3. The investigation is at threshold. Though the

first petitioner has produced some documents before

this Court, those documents are not conclusive in
4

nature. They have to pass through the test of genuinity.

However, these documents could be placed before the

investigating officer for consideration for filing of

appropriate report. Therefore, at this stage, there is no

reason to interfere with the investigation when the

allegations constitute the offences alleged. Petition

deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Brn

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2018 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 to read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registrationJOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307,312, 313,323 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509; and also TEP, RTI etc

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh