—

-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:124
CRL.P No. 11884 of 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2024

BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11884 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
SRI. KUMARA SWAMY
S/O SRI. SWAMY GOWDA,
AED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
R/AT: SINGANAHALLI, HUNSUR,
MYSURU DISTRICT,
KARNATAKA, MYSURU – 581 204.
PROFESSION: POLICE CONSTABLE.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. G M SHANTHA KUMAR, FOR
SRI. ASMA KOUSER, ADVOCATES)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY THE S.H.O.
WOMEN POLICE STATION,
DEVARAJA SUB-DIVISION,
Digitally signed by MYSURU CITY,
SHOBHA C
Location: High
REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
Court of Karnataka HIGH COURT BUILDING ANNEXURE,
BENGALURU – 560 001.
2. SMT. BHAVYASHREE.A.R.
W/O SRI. KUMARSWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,
R/AT: SINGANAHALLI, HUNSUR,
MYSURU DISTRICT, KARNATAKA,
MYSURU – 581 204.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. SUNIL S. NARAYAN, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:124
CRL.P No. 11884 of 2022

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO A. QUASHING THE FIR IN
CR.NO.5/2022 OF THE RESPONDENT NO.1 POLICE
REGISTERED AGAINST THE PETITIONER.

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

ORDER

This petition is filed by petitioner-accused No.1 under

Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing criminal proceedings in

Crime No.5/2022 registered by Women Police Station, Mysuru,

for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 504, 506, 149

of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.

Respondent No.2 is served and has remained absent.

3. The case of petitioner is that on the complaint of

respondent No.2-Bhavyashree A.R., who is wife of the present

petitioner, the police registered the complaint on 19.01.2022.

It is alleged in the complaint that her marriage was solemnized

on 28.06.2021 at K.R. Nagar. At the time of marriage, huge

dowry articles said to be given. Though the petitioner asked for

30 grams of gold during negotiation of marriage, but a day
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:124
CRL.P No. 11884 of 2022

prior to the marriage, the petitioner said to be demanded 250

grams of gold, the cash of Rs.15.00 lakhs, 1 acre of land, bike,

etc. and they agreed for the same in the presence of elders and

also handed over to the petitioner-accused. Subsequently,

after the marriage, the petitioner-accused started harassing the

complainant for additional dowry and therefore, she brought

Rs.8.00 lakhs from her maternal home. Even though, she was

pregnant for four months, the petitioner-accused was

continuously harassing her bringing dowry as well as for gold.

On 20.12.2021, a panchayat was held. Thereafter, the

petitioner-accused left house and did not return. Subsequently,

the respondent-complainant telephoned him, but the

petitioner-accused did not respond either to her call or to the

message. Again on the next day at 5.00 p.m., he came back

and went inside the room and came out of the room at 6.30

p.m. and again he assaulted her and went out and did not

return. She searched him, but it was in vain. Therefore, she

went to office of the petitioner-accused and she was informed

that he was on leave. Though she telephoned and messaged

him, he had not responded. She filed complaint against the

petitioner and his family members with Mysuru Woman Police
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:124
CRL.P No. 11884 of 2022

where counselling was held and did not get fruitful result.

Therefore, she approached the ACP as well as DCP.

Subsequently, on 29.12.2021, she approached the

Commissioner and though conciliation was made, the

petitioner-accused did not take the respondent-complainant

and he harassed her continuously. Therefore, she filed the

present complaint. The police registered the case against the

petitioner and other family members. Later, while filing charge

sheet, the police dropped the family members of the petitioner

and filed charge sheet against the petitioner. Hence, the

petitioner is before this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that

a false case has been filed against the petitioner and his family

members. Subsequently, the family members were dropped

while filing the charge sheet. It is further contended that the

complainant is having illicit intimacy with her boy friend.

Hence, the petitioner gave a complaint against the respondent-

complainant herein. On the complaint made by the petitioner

against the respondent, FIR has been registered against her.

Her boy friend has also made a statement that he is having

intimacy with her. The petitioner is the police constable and he
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC:124
CRL.P No. 11884 of 2022

has not committed any offence. The statement of witnesses,

especially the owner of the house, reveals that a false

compliant is made against the petitioner. Therefore, prays for

allowing the petition,

5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader

counsel for respondent objected the petition and contended

that there are witnesses supporting the prosecution case

including the mother of the victim and the other independent

witnesses. Therefore, it is not a fit case for quashing the

proceedings. Hence, prays for dismissing the petition.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties,

perused the records.

7. Perusal of the records reveal that the very complaint

filed by the complainant runs more than 7 pages. She has

narrated the entire incident in detail. Subsequently, the police

investigated the case and filed charge sheet and the statement

of various witnesses such as Swamy Gowda, Madan Kumar,

Puttaswamy Gowda apart from the mother of the victim, was

recorded. The extract of the charge sheet is also produced

before the Court. The complaint filed by the present
-6-
NC: 2024:KHC:124
CRL.P No. 11884 of 2022

respondent-complainant reveals that the petitioner compelled

her for additional dowry after the marriage which attracts

Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, assaulting the complainant

continuously attracts Sections 504 and 506 of IPC, and further,

for mental and physical harassment to the complainant

continuously attracts Section 498A of IPC. Therefore, this

Court cannot quash the proceedings. If at all any evidence is

available in respect of the respondent-complainant having

intimacy with her boy friend, the same can be taken as defence

for appreciation of evidence before the trial Court before going

into trial. The petitioner has not made out the case for

quashing the proceedings.

Therefore, the petition is dismissed.

Pending I.As., if any, stand disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE

CS
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 59
CT:SK00