Karnataka High Court
S Harish Kumar vs State Of Karnataka on 1 August, 2023
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:26815
CRL.P No. 22 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 22 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
1. S HARISH KUMAR
S/O G SRINIVAS
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
R/AT NO.26, OMKAR HILLS MAIN ROAD
NANJAPPA BADAVANE,
1ST MAIN, MYLASANDRA
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR
BANGALORE-560 098.
2. BALU @ BALIJA
S/O G SRINIVAS
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
R/AT NO.13, 17TH CROSS
Digitally signed by B
K
CUBBON PET
MAHENDRAKUMAR
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
BANGALORE-560 002.
KARNATAKA
3. P VINDHYA
W/O S HARISH KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
R/AT NO.26, OMKAR HILLS
MAIN ROAD, NANJAPPA BADAVANE
1ST MAIN, MYLASANDRA,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR
BANGALORE-560 098.
4. MANJUNATH G
S/O G MANJUNATHA
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
R/AT NO.43, SANJEEVAPPA
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:26815
CRL.P No. 22 of 2022
LANE CUBBONPET
BANGALORE-560 098.
5. SMT. G. PADMAVATHI
W/O G SRINIVAS
AGED ABOUT 63 6EARS,
R/AT NO.26, OMKAR HILLS
MAIN ROAD, NANJAPPA BADAVANE,
1ST MAIN, MYLASANDRA
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR
BANGALORE-560 098.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. V.P. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BANGALORE-560 001.
2. SMT. K. SARAYU
W/O UDAY KUMAR R
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
R/O NO.718, 2ND FLOOR,
6TH CROSS, 1ST BLOCK
R.V. COLLEGE POST,
JNANABHARATHI LAYOUT
BANGALORE-560 094.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. H.S. SHANKAR, HCGP FOR R-1;
SMT. RADHIKA M. ADVOCATE FOR R-2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR FILED AGAINST THE
PETITIONERS IN CRIME NO.221/2021 DATED 12.11.2021 ON
THE FILE OF THE XXXVII ADDL.C.M.M., NRUPATUNGA ROAD,
BENGALURU CITY AND BY THE BASAVANAGUDI WOMEN
POLICE STATION, REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 498A, 504, 506 OF IPC AND
SECTION 3 AND 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT.
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:26815
CRL.P No. 22 of 2022
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioners are sought to be prosecuted for the
offence punishable under Sections 498A, 504, 506 of IPC and
Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners,
learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-
State and the learned counsel for the respondent No.2.
3. The case of the prosecution is that, the complainant
is the wife of accused No.1 and accused Nos.2 & 3 are the
parents-in-laws, and accused Nos.4 to 8 are the distant
relatives of the husband and they subjected the complainant to
cruelty both mentally and physically and also a demand was
made to bring money from the parental home. Registration of
FIR of the aforesaid offences is impugned by accused Nos.4 to
8 in this petition.
4. The allegation as against these accused herein is
that they were present at the time of the marriage of accused
No.1 was solemnized with the complainant and they also
demanded to bring dowry. It is further alleged that the
accused herein when ever visited the matrimonial home used to
mock at her looks and also that the dowry given by the parents
is insufficient.
NC: 2023:KHC:26815
CRL.P No. 22 of 2022
5. Except omnibus and general allegations, there is no
specific allegation against the petitioners-accused Nos.4 to 8 as
to how, and in what manner each of the said accused subjected
the complainant to cruelty mentally and physically.
6. The Apex Court in the case of Kahkashan Kausar
@ Sonam and Others vs. State of Bihar reported in 2022
SCC OnLine SC 162 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."
7. Hence, the registration of the FIR, only on the basis
of Omnibus and General allegations is without any substance,
and the continuation of the investigation as against the
petitioners-accused Nos.4 to 8 will be an abuse of process of
law.
8. Accordingly, I pass the following:
NC: 2023:KHC:26815
CRL.P No. 22 of 2022
ORDER
i) Criminal petition is allowed.
ii) The impugned FIR in Crime No.221/2021 registered
by the Basavangudi Women Police Station, Bengaluru, pending
on the file of 37th Addl.CMM Court, Bengaluru City for the
offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 504, 506 of IPC
and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, insofar as
it relates to petitioners-accused Nos.4 to 8 is hereby quashed.
iii) The Investigating Officer to proceed against
accused Nos.1 to 3 in accordance with law.
Sd/-
JUDGE
HR
