-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. SMT.SHRUTHI@BINDU
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