Karnataka High Court

Smt Ameena Kausar Ansari W/O ... vs State Of Karnataka on 18 November, 2023

Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar

-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:13436
CRL.P No. 103517 of 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.103517 OF 2022 (482-)

BETWEEN:

SMT AMEENA KAUSAR ANSARI
W/O KAUSAR ANSARI
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
OCC. PHARMACIST
R/O H. NO.40/B(14), ARLEM, RAIA
SOUTH GOA, GOA STATE-403720.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. Z. M. HATTARKI AND
ARZOO M. MULLA., ADVOCATES)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
Digitally signed
by
VIJAYALAKSHMI
BY WOMEN POLICE STATION BELAGAVI CITY
VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI
M KANKUPPI
Date:
2023.11.22
16:41:08 +0530
REPTD BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD.

2. SMT ASIFAKHATUN MUSTAQ ANSARI
W/O MUSTAQ ANSARI
AGE 33 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE HOLD
R/O 659/2, SANT ROHIDAS NAGAR
ZEE COLONY, TILAKWADI BELAGAVI-590006.

PRESENT ADDRESS:
466/2, MUSLIM GALLI, ANGOL
BELAGAVI-590006.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. P.N.HATTI, HCGP FOR R1;
SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R2 IS SERVED)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:13436
CRL.P No. 103517 of 2022

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC.482 OF CR.P.C.
SEEKING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.907/2022 FOR
THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 498A,323,504,506
R/W 34 OF IPC WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF IIND JMFC
BELAGAVI AND ALL OTHER PROCEEDINGS ARISING THERE FROM
AGAINST THE PETITIONER/ ACCUSED NO.6 IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The petitioner has sought quashing of the entire

proceedings in C.C.No.907/2022 pending on the file of

JMFC-II Court, Belagavi registered for the offences

punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 read with

Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred as

'IPC' for brevity).

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for

respondent No.1-State. Respondent No.2 in spite of

service of notice remained absent and unrepresented.

3. Petitioner is the sister of respondent No.2's

husband. Respondent No.2 has filed the complaint and a

case came to be registered in Belagavi Woman Police

NC: 2023:KHC-D:13436 CRL.P No. 103517 of 2022

Station Crime No.36/2022 for the offence punishable

under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34

of IPC, wherein this petitioner has been arrayed as

accused No.6. The police after investigation have filed

charge-sheet against this petitioner and six others for the

offence punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506

read with Section 34 of IPC. The petitioner has been

arrayed as accused No.6 in the charge-sheet. Learned

Magistrate took cognizance of the offences and a case

came to be registered in C.C.No.907/2022. The petitioner

has sought quashing of the proceedings of the said

criminal case.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would

contend that the marriage of respondent No.2 with

accused No.1 has taken place 10 years ago. The petitioner

after marriage started residing in Goa and her marriage

has taken place in the year 2004. The allegations made in

the complaint against this petitioner and other accused are

omnibus allegations. There are no specific dates, place and

NC: 2023:KHC-D:13436 CRL.P No. 103517 of 2022

time mentioned in the complaint. On that point, he placed

reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case

of Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & Ors Vs State of

Bihar & Ors1. With this, he prayed to allow the petition.

5. Learned High Court Government Pleader would

contend that there are specific allegations against this

petitioner harassing respondent No.2 along with other

accused and giving her life threat and also instigating

accused No.1 to marry some other lady so as to get more

dowry. There are no grounds for quashing the

proceedings. With this, he prayed to dismiss the petition.

6. The marriage of respondent No.2 with accused

No.1-Mustak has taken place 10 years prior to the

complaint. It is alleged in the complaint that after some

days of marriage, husband of respondent No.2, her

mother-in-law and father-in-law instigated her husband

and her husband used to assault her and abuse her in

filthy language. At that time, her parents approached the

2022 (6) SCC 599.

NC: 2023:KHC-D:13436 CRL.P No. 103517 of 2022

Jamat members who advised them. It is stated that

thereafter, they looked after her well and again they

started harassing her. It is alleged that father-in-law,

mother-in-law of respondent No.2, her mother-in-law's

sister's son Nisar and his wife Ruksana and her sister-in-

law/Amina Kousar (petitioner) and her husband's brother

Tahir started harassing her. It is alleged that they have

threatened to kill her and instigated her husband to marry

another lady. There is no specific date mentioning any of

the incidents which are narrated in the complaint. The

allegation made in the complaint against the petitioner and

other accused is general omnibus allegation. The charge-

sheet witnesses namely respondent No.2's mother and her

two younger brothers have stated similar to that of

averments made in the complaint. Learned counsel for the

petitioner has placed on record the photo copy of Adhar

Card and Election I.D Card wherein, this petitioner has

been shown as residing in 'Goa'. The Hon'ble Apex Court in

the case of Kahkashan Kausar (supra), has held as

under;

NC: 2023:KHC-D:13436 CRL.P No. 103517 of 2022

"12. Before we delve into greater detail on the nature and content of allegations made, it becomes pertinent to mention that incorporation of section 498A of IPC was aimed at preventing cruelty committed upon a woman by her husband and her in-laws, by facilitating rapid state intervention. However, it is equally true, that in recent times, matrimonial litigation in the country has also increased significantly and there is a greater disaffection and friction surrounding the institution of marriage, now, more than ever. This has resulted in an increased tendency to employ provisions such as 498A IPC as instruments to settle personal scores against the husband and his relatives.

14. Previously, in the landmark judgment of this court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and Anr; (2014) 8 SCC 273, it was also observed:-

"4. There is a phenomenal increase in matrimonial disputes in recent years. The institution of marriage is greatly revered in this country. Section 498-A IPC was introduced with avowed object to combat the menace of harassment to a woman at the hands of her husband and his relatives. The fact that Section 498-A IPC is a cognizable and non-bailable offence has lent it a dubious place of pride amongst the provisions that are used as weapons rather than shield by disgruntled wives. The simplest way to harass is to get the husband and his relatives arrested under this provision. In a quite number of cases, bed- ridden grandfathers and

NC: 2023:KHC-D:13436 CRL.P No. 103517 of 2022

grand-mothers of the husbands, their sisters living abroad for decades are arrested."

17. Recently, in K. Subba Rao v. The State of Telangana, (2018) 14 SCC 452 it was also observed that:-

"6. The Courts should be careful in proceeding against the distant relatives in crimes pertaining to matrimonial disputes and dowry deaths. The relatives of the husband should not be roped in on the basis of omnibus allegations unless specific instances of their involvement in the crime are made out."

7. The allegations made against this petitioner is a

general omnibus allegations. Therefore, upon

consideration of the relevant circumstances and in the

absence of any specific role attributed to the petitioner, it

would be unjust if the petitioners are forced to go through

the tribulations of a trial i.e., general and omnibus

allegations cannot manifest in a situation where the

relatives of the complainant's husband are forced to

undergo trial. In view of that above, the proceedings

against this petitioner in C.C.No.907/2022 pending on the

NC: 2023:KHC-D:13436 CRL.P No. 103517 of 2022

file of JMFC-II Court, Belagavi are requires to be quashed.