SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Vasu R vs The State Of Karnataka on 14 February, 2018

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

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Copyright © 2018 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 to read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registrationJOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307,312, 313,323 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509; and also TEP, RTI etc

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh