SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Smt Pushpa Dinesh vs The State Of Karnataka on 24 June, 2019

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 24th DAY OF JUNE, 2019

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA

CRIMINAL PETITION No.2348/2017

BETWEEN:

Smt. Pushpa Dinesh
W/o late Dinesh A.S.
Aged about 46 years
Residing at 141/3,
Adhibairav Nilaya
Bannerghatta Road, Arakere,
Bengaluru-560 076.
…Petitioner
(By Sri V. Subash Reddy, Advocate)

AND:

1. The State of Karnataka
through Hulimavu Police Station
Represented by its State Public Prosecutor
High Court Building,
Bengaluru-560 001.

2. Smt. A.Yashoda
W/o B.Ravi Kumar
Residing at No.735,
5th Main Road, Vijayanagar,
Bengaluru-560 040.
…Respondents
(By Sri Vijayakumar Majage, Addl. SPP for R1;
Sri M.N.Madhusudhan, Advocate for R2)
-2-

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C praying to quash the entire proceedings in
C.C.No.13871/2016 on the file of V Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, in respect of the FIR,
complaint and charge sheet filed by the 1st respondent
against the petitioner in Crime No.459/2015 for the
offences punishable under Section 498(A) r/w. Section 34
of IPC and Sections 3 and Section4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

This Criminal Petition coming on for Admission this
day, the Court made the following:-

ORDER

Petitioner is accused No.4 in the charge sheet laid by

respondent No.1 police for the offence punishable under

Section 498A r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and

Sections 3 and Section4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned

counsel for respondent No.2 and learned High Court

Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1-State.

Perused the records.

3. Respondent No.2 married accused No.1 on

30.10.2014. She lodged a complaint against accused No.1
-3-

and three other accused including the petitioner herein on

29.6.2015 alleging that her husband namely accused No.1

and other accused were ill-treating and harassing her in

the matrimonial home and making demand for additional

dowry.

4. Insofar as the present petitioner is concerned, in

the charge sheet it is alleged that petitioner herein

instigated accused No.1 to demand additional dowry from

respondent No.2. These allegations, even if accepted as

true, do not make out the offence punishable under

Section 498A of Indian Penal Code or Sections 3 and Section4 of

Dowry Prohibition Act insofar as petitioner is concerned.

Regarding the offence under the provisions of SectionDowry

Prohibition Act are concerned, the allegations are directed

only against accused No.1 and other family members of her

husband. According to the prosecution petitioner herein

was a neighbour of accused No.1. The allegations made in

the complaint are that accused No.1 was talking with the

petitioner whenever he used to visit the temple. This fact,
-4-

even if accepted as true, does not make out the offence

punishable under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code. In

order to constitute the offence punishable under Section

498A of Indian Penal Code, whoever, being the husband or

the relative of the husband of a woman, should be the

perpetrator of cruelty. It is not the case of the prosecution

that the petitioner herein is in anyway related to accused

Nos.1 to 3 or to 2nd respondent. There are no allegations in

the complaint or in the charge sheet that the petitioner

herein was intentionally causing cruelty to 2nd respondent

within the meaning of Section 498A of the Indian Penal

Code. In that view of the matter, the prosecution of the

petitioner, being contrary to the provisions of Section 498A

of Indian Penal Code and the provisions of the SectionDowry

Prohibition Act is nothing but an abuse of process of Court

and therefore cannot be allowed to continue.

5. Consequently, petition is allowed. Proceedings in

C.C.No.13871/2016 on the file of V Additional C.M.M.

Court, Bengaluru, are quashed insofar as
-5-

petitioner/accused No.4 is concerned. Trial shall proceed

against accused Nos.1 to 3 in accordance with law.

Sd/-

JUDGE

*AP/-

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 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