1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.268/2017
BETWEEN:
1. VASU R
S/O RANGARAJU
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
2. H V RATHNAMMA
W/O VASU R
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
PETITIONER Nos.1 TO 2 ARE
R/AT NO.43/1, UDAYANAGARA,
BIHIND TIN FACTORY,
BANGALORE-560016
3. BABU H B
S/O LATE VASUDEVARAJ
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
4. AMULA @ LAXMI
W/O BABU H V
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
PETITIONER Nos. 3 AND 4
R/AT NO.825, HOODI
RAJ PALYA, BANGALORE-560048
… PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. R D PANCHAM, ADV., )
2
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY MAHADEVAPURA POLICE STATION
REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BANGALORE-560001
2. SHWETHA
W/O SHARAN RAJ
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
R/AT NO.1198/51, 1ST FLOOR,
10TH CROSS, ASHOKNAGARA,
BSK 1ST MAIN, HANUMANTHANAGARA
BANGALORE-560050
… RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. NARARULLA KHAN,HCPG FOR R1)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO
QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET IN C.C.NO.51326/2016 FOR
THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A OF IPC AND SEC.3, 4 OF D.P
ACT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF X ACMM, MAYOHALL,
BANGALORE.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-,
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.
Perused the records.
2. The petitioners have sought for quashing of
C.C.No.51326/2016 on the file of the X Additional Chief
3
Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayohall, Bengaluru, for the
offences under Section 498-A of IPC and Sections 3 and
4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. The case has been registered in the year
2016. The Trial Court has already framed the charges
on 28.11.2016, wherein the accused (petitioners herein)
pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. On the basis
of such plea being recorded, the case is now set down
for evidence. In fact, PW.1 was already examined and
the case is posted for cross-examination of PW.1.
Under the above said circumstances, I do not find any
strong reason to entertain the petition under Section
482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the entire proceedings. The
petitioners have not challenged the charges framed
against them. Under the above said circumstances, the
petition does not survive to be considered on merit and
hence, the same is liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
4
If petitioners are aggrieved by the framing of
charges, they are at liberty to question the same, if law
permits.
In view of dismissal of the petition, I.A.No.1/2017
for stay does not survive for consideration and the same
stands dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
PMR
