1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.9350 OF 2016 BETWEEN: Shri. Porangada Ponnappa, Aged about 38 years, S/o. P.C.Belliappa, Resident of Ranipet Madikeri - 571 201. ...PETITIONER (By Shri M.R.C.Manohar, Advocate) AND: 1. The State of Karnataka by Gonikoppa Police Station, Kodagu, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, High Court Complex, Bengaluru - 560 001. 2. Smt. K.Jhothsna, D/o. Karumbaiah, 2 R/o. Kaikeri Village, Gonikoppa, Kodagu - 571 213. ...RESPONDENTS (By Shri Vijayakumar Majage, Additional State Public Prosecutor for R-1) ***** This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.866/2015(CR.No.77/2015) registered by the Gonikoppa Police, Kodagu for the offence punishable Under Section 498A of IPC and the case is pending on the file of Civil Judge and JMFC, Ponnampet, Kodagu. This Criminal Petition coming on for Admission this day, the court made the following: ORDER
The petitioner is said to be estranged from his wife –
second respondent. He was in the Merchant Navy and it
transpires that he was posted to work at Syprus and it was an
occasion for the second respondent to visit him along with her
child. It is her accusation that she was ill-treated when the
petitioner was under the influence of alcohol and he had
physically and mentally harassed her. She had later learnt that
he was having an illicit relationship with another woman whose
husband was incidentally the captain of the ship. The said
captain had committed suicide on account of frustration and had
blamed his wife and the petitioner for his situation. The Delhi
police have also registered a case and investigation is on. It
then transpires that on the basis of a complaint by the second
respondent for an offence punishable under Section 498-A of
the Indian Penal Code, 1860, the petitioner’s passport has been
seized while he was on the high seas and he has now lost his
job and is residing in Coorg and the respondent also is a
resident of Kodagu.
2. In view of the criminal proceedings which are without
any basis, the petitioner is under pressure and therefore seeks
quashing of the proceedings.
3. Since the proceedings have been initiated on the basis
of a complaint by the second respondent, the same would have
to be taken to its logical conclusion. If there is no case at all or
if there is no foundation laid for the complaint, the petitioner
would be entitled to have a discharge.
In that view of the matter, there is no warrant for this
court to interfere. The petition is rejected.