Karnataka High Court
D Mahammad vs State Of Karnataka By on 12 December, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:45322
CRL.P No. 3130 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3130 OF 2019
BETWEEN:
1. D. MAHAMMAD
S/O LATE HYDER VALI
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
R/AT D.NO.17/28, NEERUGANTI
ANANTHAPUR , A.P
2. SMT. BANU BEE
W/O. LATE HYDER VALI
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
AWARDU, YENUMALIPALLI
ANANTHAPURA - 515 134
ANDHRA PRADESH
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. RAMACHANDAR DESU, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
Digitally BY HEBBAL POLICE STATION
signed by
SUMA REP. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER,
Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
HIGH BENGALURU-560001.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
2. SMT. RANI S.N.,
W/O. MOHAMMED D.,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
R/AT NO.177, I MAIN,
BHUVANESHWARINAGARA,
SULTANPALYA, R.T. NAGAR POST,
BENGALURU-32
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. WAHEEDA M.M., HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER
FOR RESPONDENT NO.1;
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:45322
CRL.P No. 3130 of 2019
SRI. SHIVA REDDY T.N., ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2
(ABSENT))
THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE
OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE
PROCEEDINGS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED FIRST
ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTARATE BENGALURU
IN C.C.NO.17772/2018 (CRIME NO.56/2018).
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioners have challenged the prosecution
launched against them in C.C.No.17772/2018
(Cr.No.56/2018) pending trial before the I Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru for the offences
punishable under Sections 498A, 506 read with section 34 of
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (henceforth referred to as 'IPC' for
short) and also Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act,
1961.
2. The respondent No.1 registered Cr.No.56/2018
for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 506 read
with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry
Prohibition Act, based on the information furnished by the
respondent No.2. After investigation, a charge sheet was
NC: 2023:KHC:45322
filed against the petitioners for the aforesaid offences. The
Trial Court took cognizance of the offences and issued
process to the petitioners. Being aggrieved by the same, this
petition is filed.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits
that the father of the respondent No.2 had also lodged a
complaint before the police on 29.03.2018 at Ananthpur
district and a case in Cr.No.141/2018 was registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 498A and 324 of IPC. He
therefore, contends that the subsequent crime registered by
the respondent No.1 on 01.04.2018 ought to have been
treated as further information and must have been
transferred to the police at Ananthpur district for
investigation and a conclusive report. The learned counsel
for the petitioners submits that the case in Ananthpur district
has already reached a final stage, and therefore, the instant
proceedings initiated by the respondent No.1 is a clear
violation of the mandate of judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court
in the case of T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala and
others [(2001) 6 SCC 181]. He therefore, prays that
NC: 2023:KHC:45322
the impugned prosecution launched against the petitioner be
set at naught.
4. The learned counsel for the respondent No.2 has
consistently remained absent.
5. The learned High Court Government Pleader on
the other hand did admit that a parallel case was registered
before the jurisdictional police at Ananthpur district and
therefore, the instant case registered by the respondent
No.1 ought to have been transferred to the police at
Ananthpur district for a comprehensive investigation and a
conclusive report.
6. In view of the aforesaid, having regard to the
fact that prosecution of the petitioners is pending
consideration before the Court in Ananthpur district, virtually
on the same set of facts, it is improper to expose the
petitioners to an another prosecution, on the very same
facts, at the instant of the respondent No.2.
7. In that view of the matter, the petition is
allowed and the impugned prosecution of the petitioners in
NC: 2023:KHC:45322
C.C.No.17772/2018 pending trial before the I Additional
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru for the offences
punishable under Sections 498A, 506 read with 34 of IPC
and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 is
quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
HJ
