SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Smt Parvathamma vs State Of Karnataka By on 19 March, 2019

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.781 OF 2014

BETWEEN:

1. SMT.PARVATHAMMA
W/O SHIVALINGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS
R/O CHIKKAMALALI VILLAGE
CHANNAGIRI TALUK
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 213.

2. SRI SHIVALINGAPPA
S/O CHANNABASAPPA
AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS
R/O CHIKKAMALALI VILLAGE
CHANNAGIRI TALUK
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 213.

3. SRI CHANDRASHEKARA
S/O SHIVALINGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
NO.9, SUDAKARASHETTY BUILDING
KAMMASANDRA VINAYAKANAGAR
ELECTRONIC CITY
BENGALURU-560 100.

4. SRI MALLIKAPPA
S/O SHIVALINGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R/O KAGGI VILLAGE
CHANNAGIRI TALUK
-2-

DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 213.

5. SMT.ANNAPURNAMMA
D/O SHIVALINGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
R/O DASIKATTE VILLAGE
RAMGIRI HOBLI
HOLALKERE TALUK
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 526.
…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI S G RAJENDRA REDDY, ADV.)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY CHANNAGIRI POLICE STATION
CHANNAGIRI
BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU-560 001.

2. [email protected]
W/O K.S.KUMARA
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
R/O CHIKKAMALALI VILLAGE
CHANNAGIRI TALUK
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 213.
… RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI VIJAYA KUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. SPP. FOR R-1
SRI A.D.RAMANANDA, ADV. FOR R-2- ABSENT)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT AND
FIR IN CRIME NO.508/2013 REGISTERED BY THE
RESPONDENT CHANNAGIRI POLICE, DAVANAGERE
DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 498A, 342, 149 OF IPC
AND SEC. 3, 4 OF D.P. ACT 1961, PENDNG ON THE FILE OF
THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHANNAGIRI, DAVANAGERE
-3-

DISTRICT IN RESPECT OF THE PETITIONERS HEREIN AND
ETC.

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

ORDER

Petitioners are accused Nos.2 to 6 in

Crime No.508/2013 registered for the offences punishable

under Sections 498-A, 342 read with Section 149 of IPC

and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

2. The complainant – Smt.Shruthi @ Bindu is the

wife of the accused No.1. She married accused No.1 on

22.11.2009. According to her, at the time of marriage, a

cash of Rs.1,50,000/- and 10 tholas of gold were given to

accused No.1 and thereafter, she was residing in the

matrimonial home and at that time, she was subjected to

ill-treatment and harassment by the petitioners. In the

complaint, it is alleged that accused No.1 was demanding

additional dowry from her and for not satisfying the said

demand, she was confined in the room for days together

without giving any food and water. In the complaint, she
-4-

has stated that on 04.09.2013, at about 7.00 p.m. when

she was on her way to Channagiri, accused No.1 pushed

her from the bike and snatched four tholas of chain worn

by her and also assaulted and threatened her. Insofar as

the petitioners herein are concerned, common and general

allegations are made stating that the petitioners herein

were also ill-treating and harassing her. The complainant

has not cited any specific instance of cruelty or

harassment by any of the petitioners making out the

offence under Sections 498-A, 342 read with Section 149

of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act,

1961.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has pointed

out that much before the lodging the above complaint,

accused No.3 himself had lodged a complaint against the

complainant and her parents in Crime No.366/2013. In

the said complaint, it was alleged that on 04.09.2013 at

about 8.30 p.m., the complainant namely, Smt.Shruthi,
-5-

her parents and uncle came to the house of accused No.3

and forced him to transfer the immovable properties in the

name of the complainant and on account of his refusal, he

was assaulted and abused by the complainant – Shruthi

and other accused named therein. This FIR was

registered on 04.09.2013, on the very date of incident and

the statement of accused No.3 was recorded in the

hospital thereby, lending credence to the incident alleged

in the said complaint. Whereas, the instant complaint is

lodged on 24.12.2013. Except stating that on earlier

occasions, the complainant was subjected to ill-treatment

and harassment by the petitioners and her husband, this

complaint does not disclose any cause of action leading to

the prosecution of the petitioners herein for the above

offences.

4. The circumstances narrated above clearly

indicate that the instant complaint is a sequel to the

complaint lodged by accused No.3 against the second
-6-

respondent / complainant. The allegations made in the

instant complaint indicate that it is an after thought and a

vindictive attempt by second respondent calculated to

implicate the entire family members of accused No.1 in

false charges. The complaint lodged by the second

respondent before the Child and Women Welfare

Department goes to show that she had no grievance

whatsoever against the petitioners herein. In the said

complaint, she had merely alleged that her husband was

ill-treating and harassing her. There is not even a remote

reference of the petitioners herein in the said complaint

that the petitioners were subjecting her to any ill-

treatment, cruelty in the matrimonial house. Thus, it is

evident, that the allegations made in the instant complaint

are malafide, vexations apart from being false and

mischievous. As the material on record discloses that the

criminal proceedings initiated by the respondent are

manifestly attended with malafides and are maliciously

instituted with an ulterior motive for wrecking vengeance
-7-

on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private

and personal grudge, the inherent power under Section

482 Cr.P.C. is required to be exercised to secure the ends

of justice and to prevent the abuse of process of Court.

5. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The

proceedings initiated against the petitioners namely,

accused Nos.2 to 6 for the alleged offences punishable

under Sections 498-A, 342 read with Section 149 of IPC

and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961

in Crime No.508/2013, are hereby quashed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

VMB

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

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

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 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