SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sri. Dandi Botla Gangadhar vs State Of Karnataka 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.3699 OF 2013

BETWEEN:

1. SRI. DANDI BOTLA GANGADHAR
S/O D. RAJASHEKAR, 32 YEARS

2. SRI D. RAJASHEKAR
S/O LATE D. NARAYANAMURTHY, 60 YEARS

3. SMT. SHIVAKUMA SUNDARI
W/O D. RAJASHEKAR, 55 YEARS

4. SRI D. HARIKRISHNA
S/O D. RAJASHEKAR, 34 YEARS

5. SMT. D. USHA
W/O D. HARIKRISHNA, 30 YEARS

6. SMT. T. VANAJA
W/O T. PRASAD, 30 YEARS

7. SRI T. PRASAD
S/O T. SHIVARAMA SHARMA, 35 YEARS

8. SRI SHIVARAMA KRISHNA
S/O KRISHNA SHASTRI, 40 YEARS

ALL ARE R/O NO.G-2,
SRI SAI SHESHU APARTMENTS
2

12-2-828-A/2, AMBA GARDENS
MAHATHI PADAM,
HYDERABAD-560028.
… PETITIONERS

(BY SRI: VENKAT SUBBA RAO G S, ADVOCATE)

AND

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
HANUMANTHANAGAR POLICE
HANUMANTHANAGAR
BENGALURU-560026.

2. SMT. K.V. SUMALATHA KUMARI
W/O DANDI BOTLA GANGADHAR,
AGE 30 YEARS
NO.91, 6TH CROSS, ASHOK NAGAR
BANASHANKARI
BANGALORE 560050.
… RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI: VIJAYA KUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. SPP FOR R1;
SRI: ADARSH, ADVOCATE FOR
SMT: MELANIE SEBASTIAN, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH
THE COMPLAINT LODGED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AGAINST
THE PETITIONERS IN CR. NO.101/2013 BEFORE THE I A.C.M.M.,
BANGALORE WITH THE 1ST RESPONDENT POLICE FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 506, 34, 498A,307
R/W SEC.3 AND 4 OF D.P.ACT VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND
CONSEQUENTLY DISCHARGE THE PETITIONERS FROM THE
OFENCES ALLEGED AGAINST THEM IN CR. NO.101/2013.

THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
3

ORDER

Learned counsel for the petitioners’ files a memo alongwith

the following documents:-

1. Certified copy of decree in M.C.No.3309/2018.

2. Certified copy of Memorandum of settlement in
M.C.No.3309/2018

3. Certified copy of Judgment in
C.C.No.17384/2014.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

counsel for respondent No.2 and learned Addl. SPP for

respondent No.1.

2. Petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 8 in Cr.No.101/2013

registered for the offences punishable under sections 506, 34,

498A, 307 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry

Prohibition Act. As against accused Nos.2 to 8, further

investigation was stayed by orders of this Court. consequently,

investigation was carried on against accused No.1 and a charge

sheet was filed against him under sections 498A, 324, 506 of

Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of D.P. Act.
4

3. Certified copy of the judgment and order dated

3.11.2018 produced by the learned counsel in

C.C.No.17384/2014 indicates that after trial, accused No.1 is

acquitted of the charges under Sections 498A, 324, 506 of

Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of D.P. Act. Even though

offence under section 307 Indian Penal Code was invoked in the

FIR, after investigation, the said charge was dropped in the

charge sheet. Even otherwise, the allegation attracting Section

307 Indian Penal Code were directed only against accused No.1.

Insofar accused Nos.2 to 8 are concerned, there are blanket and

omnibus allegations that all these petitioners committed act of

cruelty and ill-treatment to respondent No.2 and instigated

accused No.1 to make a demand for additional dowry. But after

trial, accused No.1 having been acquitted of all the above

offences, on the same set of facts and evidence relied on by the

prosecution, in my view, the prosecution of the petitioners viz.,

accused Nos.2 to 8 for the above offences would be a futile

exercise. In the wake of the findings recorded by the trial court

with regard to the involvement of accused No.1 in the above

offences, benefit of the said order is required to be extended to
5

the petitioners herein. Thus considering the above facts and

circumstances, in order to sub-serve the ends of justice, the

proceedings initiated against petitioner Nos.2 to 8 deserve to be

quashed.

Consequently, the petition is allowed. The proceedings

initiated against the petitioner Nos.2 to 8 arising out of

Cr.No.101/2013 stand quashed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

*mn/-

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 © 2019 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…

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh