Saleem Pasha Hafeez vs State Of Karnataka By
2022 Latest Caselaw 9145 Kant

                       1




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022

                    BEFORE

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

     CRIMINAL PETITION No.2942 OF 2018

BETWEEN:

1.   SALEEM PASHA HAFEEZ
     S/O LATE ABDUL HAFEEZ
     AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
     R.AT ANCHINANAMANE KARE,
     NO.140, C.N.ROAD, SEEIGABAIG,
     BHADRAVATHI,
     SHIVAMOGGA-577301

2.   ALEEM PASHA
     S/O LATE ABDUL HAFEEZ,
     AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
     R/AT PESHAMMA MOHALLA
     AHIRA MASIDHI,
     SHARADA NURSING HOME
     SIRA, SIRA TALUK,
     TUMKUR DISTRICT-572137

3.   SMT.IRFANA
     W/O ALEEM PASHA,
     AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
     R/AT PESHAMMA MOHALLA,
     AHIRA MASIDHI,
     SHARADA NURSING HOME
     SIRA, SIRA TALUK,
     TUMKUR DISTRICT-572137

4.   SMT.SAHEEN PARVEEN
     W/O AHMED,
     AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
     R/AT ANCHINANAMANE KARE,
                            2




       NO.149, C.N.ROAD,
       SEEIGE BAGI,
       BHADRAVATHI,
       SHIVAMOGGA-577301

5.     SMT.SHABEENA PARVEEN
       W/O RAFIQ AHMED,
       AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
       R.AT ANCHINANAMANE KARE,
       NO.149, C.N.ROAD,
       SEEIGABAIG, BHADRAVATHI,
       SHIVAMOGGA-577301
                                  ...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI SUHAIB FAZEEL MADAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
       BY BYATARAYANAPURA POLICE
       REPRESENTED BY SPP,
       HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
       BANGALORE-560001

2.   SMT.LATIFUNNISSA
     W/O SALEEM PASHA HAFEEZ,
     AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
     R/AT 135, 5TH CROSS,
     3RD MAIN, KASTURBANAGARA,
     BENGALURU-560026
                                ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI ROHITH.B.J, HCGP FOR R1,
    SRI M.P.VISHWANATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

       THIS   CRIMINAL   PETITION   IS   FILED   UNDER
SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH ENTIRE
PROCEEINGS IN C.C.NO.12795/2014 (CR.NO.279/2013)
PENDING BEFORE THE III A.C.M.M. BANGALORE FOR
THE ALLEGED OFFENCES P/U/S 498A, 506 R/W 34 OF
                                    3




IPC   AND    SEC.3,       4   OF       D.P.ACT     FILED   BY   THE
BYATARAYANAPURA POLICE IN CR.NO.279/2013.


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

                              ORDER

Charge sheet is filed for the offences punishable

under Sections 498A, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC

and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961

alleging that the complainant witness No.1 is the

legally wedded wife of accused No.1 and accused

Nos.2 to 8 are the brother-in-law and sister-in-law's

of CW-1 and she was subjected to cruelty both

mentally and physically by the accused and also there

was a demand to bring money from parental house

for purchasing a site.

2. The learned Magistrate after accepting the

charge sheet took cognizance of the aforesaid

offences and issued summons. Taking exception of the

same, this petition is filed.

3. I have considered the submissions made by

the learned counsel for the petitioners and also learned

HCGP appearing for the respondent-State and learned

counsel appearing for respondent No.2.

4. Perusal of the charge sheet discloses that

accused Nos.2 to 8 are the brother-in-law and sisters-

in-law's of CW-1 and they were not residing in the

matrimonial home of CW-1 and accused No.1. Except

omnibus and general allegations, there are no specific

allegations or material produced along with the charge

sheet as to how and in what manner CW-1 was

subjected to cruelty by accused Nos.2 to 8 and also

there was a demand to bring money for purchasing the

site.

5. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of

Kahkashan Kausar Vs. State of Bihar reported in

2022 SCC Online SC 162 para 18 has held as follows:

"The above-mentioned decisions clearly demonstrate that this Court has at numerous instances expressed concern over the misuse of section 498A IPC and the increased tendency of implicating

relatives of the husband in matrimonial disputes, without analysing the long term ramifications of a trial on the complainant as well as the accused. It is further manifest from the said judgments that false implication by way of general omnibus allegations made in the course of matrimonial dispute, if left unchecked would result in misuse of the process of law. Therefore, this court by way of its judgments has warned the courts from proceeding against the relatives and in- laws of the husband when no prima facie case is made out against them."

6. In the absence of any corroborative material

except for omnibus and general allegations made

against accused Nos.2 to 8, the filing of the charge

sheet against the said accused is without any

substance. It would be an abuse of process of law if the

petitioners are subjected to trial.

Accordingly, I pass the following:

ORDER

i. Criminal petition is allowed.

ii. The impugned proceedings in

C.C.No.12795/2014 pending on the file of III Additional

Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, insofar relates

to petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 8 is hereby quashed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

rv