Ravi Kumar B C vs The State Of Karnataka By
2022 Latest Caselaw 9385 Kant

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 9385 Kant
Judgement Date : 22 June, 2022

Karnataka High Court

Ravi Kumar B C vs The State Of Karnataka By on 22 June, 2022

Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar

                          1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JUNE, 2022

                       BEFORE

 THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

       CRIMINAL PETITION No.8835 OF 2018

BETWEEN:

1. RAVI KUMAR B C.,
   S/O D.N.CHANNEGOWDA,
   AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
   R/AT NO.161, 1ST MAIN,
   3RD CROSS, HOYSALA NAGARA,
   ISEC(P), NAGARABHAVI,
   BANGALORE - 560 091.

2. LATHAKUMARI
   W/O RAMAKRISHNAIAH, 40 YEARS,
   R/AT NO.3, 1ST A MAIN ROAD,
   BAIRAVESHWARA NAGARA,
   NAGARABHAVI MAIN ROAD,
   MUDALAPALYA,
   BANGALORE - 560 072.

3. RAMAKRISHANAIAH
   S/O JAVARAPPA,
   AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
   R/AT NO.3, 1ST A MAIN ROAD,
   BAIRAVESHWARA NAGARA,
   NAGARABHAVI MAIN ROAD,
   MUDALAPALYA,
   BANGALORE - 560 072.
                                     ...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. R.SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE)
                             2


AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
   BY BASAVANAGUDI WOMEN POLICE STATION,
   BANGALORE.
   REPRESENTED BY SPP,
   HIGH COURT BUILDING,
   BENGALURU - 560 001.

2. SMT.PADHMAVATHI.R.,
   W/O ASHOK KUMAR B .C.,
   AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
   R/AT NO.8, MUKAMBIKA NAGARA,
   FAREST GATE, BAPA GRAMA(P),
   MAGADI MAIN, BANGALORE - 560 072.
                                   ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.ROHITH B.J, HCGP FOR R1;
        R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

     THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
482 OF CR.P.C. BY THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO QUASH
THE FINAL REPORT FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
HEREIN FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498(A) R/W 34 OF IPC
AND SECTION 3 AND 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT IN
CR.NO.15/2018 PENDING ON THE FILE OF II ADDL. C.M.M
BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.20331/2018.

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

                         ORDER

Charge sheet is filed for the offences punishable

u/s.498-A r/w 34, Sec. 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act,

1961 , 506 of IPC alleging that the marriage of 2nd

respondent was solemnized with accused no.1 on

12.11.2006 and at the time of marriage the parents of

respondent no.2 had given jewellery and cash as

dowry. After the marriage accused no.1 subjected the

complainant to cruelty both mentally and physically

and demanded to bring a sum of Rs.10 lakhs from

parental home at the instigation of accused nos. 4, 5

and 6.

2. The learned Magistrate after accepting the

charge sheet took cognizance of the aforesaid offence

and issued summons to the petitioners. Taking

exception to this, the petitioners have filed this

petition.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the

petitioners submits that except omnibus and general

allegations, there is no specific allegation as against

the petitioners as to how and in what manner they

instigated accused no.1 to subject respondent No.2 to

cruelty both mentally and physically and also

demanded to bring a sum of Rs.10 lakhs from her

parental home. Hence, he submits that the charge

sheet filed on the basis of omnibus and general

allegations is without substance.

4. Learned HCGP submits that the charge

sheet material discloses the commission of offence

alleged against the petitioners-accused and the same

does not warrant any interference.

5. I have considered the submissions made

by the learned counsel for the parties.

6. The only allegation as against the

petitioners-accused herein is that they instigated

accused no.1 to subject respondent no.2 to cruelty

and also demanded to bring money from her parental

home. Except omnibus and general allegations there

is no specific allegations as against the petitioners-

accused.

7. The Apex Court in the case of Kahkashan

Kausar @ Sonam and Others vs. State of Bihar1 at

para No.18 has held as follows:

"18. 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."

8. In absence of any corroborative material, the

petitioners-accused have been falsely implicated by

respondent no.2 with an ulterior motive to wreak

vengeance and with revengeful intent. Hence the

2022 SCC OnLine SC 162

impugned proceedings as against petitioners-accused

requires to be quashed. Accordingly I pass the

following:

ORDER

i) Criminal Petition is allowed.

ii) The impugned proceedings in

C.C.NO.20331/2018 pending on the file of II Addl.