Karnataka High Court
Nagendra @ Nagindra S/O Peerappa Bulba ... vs Renuka W/O Mallikarjun Bulba on 16 January, 2025
Author: S.Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:244
CRL.P No. 200422 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200422 OF 2023
(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
1. NAGENDRA @ NAGINDRA S/O PEERAPPA BULBA,
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O. HOUSE NO. 9/7C, 587,
NEAR ISHWAR TEMPLE, DEVI NAGAR,
ALANDA ROAD, KALABURAGI-585101.
2. SMT. CHANDARKALA W/O NAGENDRA
@ NAGINDRA BULBA,
AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORKS,
R/O. HOUSE NO. 9/7C, 587,
NEAR ISHWAR TEMPLE, DEVI NAGAR,
Digitally signed
by SHILPA R ALANDA ROAD, TQ. AND DIST. KALABURAGI 585101
TENIHALLI
Location: HIGH 3. SHRIDEVI D/O NAGENDRA BULBA
COURT OF W/O PREMSAGAR J,
KARNATAKA AGE: 27 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORKS,
R/O. HOUSE NO. 9/7C, 587,
NEAR ISHWAR TEMPLE, DEVI NAGAR,
ALANDA ROAD, TQ. AND DIST. KALABURAGI 585101.
(PRESENTLY RESIDING AT H NO. 8-12-68-69,
JAYA NAGAR LAYOUT,
BOLAMANADODDI ROAD RAICHUR-584103.
4. SIDDALINGA S/O NAGINDRA BULBA,
AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. HOUSE NO. 9/7C, 587,
NEAR ISHWAR TEMPLE, DEVI NAGAR,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:244
CRL.P No. 200422 of 2023
ALANDA ROAD, TQ. AND DIST. KALABURAGI-
585101.
5. SHRI NARSANNA S/O SONURU @ SOMANNUR
@ SHARNAPPA BHIMANHALLI,
AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. HOUSE NO. 1/190, DARGA AREA,
HATIKUNI, HATTIKUNI VILLAGE,
DIST. YADGIRI-585202.
6. SHRISHIAL @ HANAMESH S/O NARASANNA SONURU,
AGE: 27 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. HOUSE NO. 2/196, NEAR DARGA, VTC,
HATTIKUNI VILLAGE, DIST. YADGIRI-585202.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI RAVI B. CHAWAN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SMT. RENUKA W/O MALLIKARJUN BULBA,
AGE: 36 YEARS,
OCC: GOVT PRIMARY SCHOOL TEACHER,
R/O. HOUSE NO. 9/7C, 587,
NEAR ISHWAR TEMPLE, DEVI NAGAR,
ALANDA ROAD, KALABURAGI-585101,
NOW AT C/O. SUKADEV S/O TUKARAM TALAWAR,
BATAGUNAKI, TQ. INDI DIST. VIJAYAPUR.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. NEEVA M. CHIMKOD, ADVOCATE)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PRESENT
PETITIONER NO. 1-6/RESPONDENT NO. 2-7 IN CRL MISC
NO.1317/2021 PENDING ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND
JMFC AT INDI VIJAYAPURA, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
U/S 12 OF PWDV ACT.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER ARGUMENTS,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:244
CRL.P No. 200422 of 2023
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
1. Petitioners herein who are the respondents 2 to 7 are
before this Court under section 482 of Cr.P.C with a prayer
to quash the entire proceedings in the said case.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. Respondent had filed Crl.Misc.No.1317/2021 before
the court of learned Magistrate at Indi, Vijayapura district
under section 12 of the Protection of Women from
Domestic Violence Act 2005 and in the said proceedings
the petitioners herein are arraigned as accused No.2 to 7.
Being aggrieved by the said proceedings initiated as
against them, petitioners are before this court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
husband of the respondent-Sri Mallikarjun had filed
M.C.No.76/2023 before the jurisdictional Family Court at
Kalaburagi under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act
NC: 2025:KHC-K:244
seeking a Decree of Restitution of Conjugal rights and said
petition was allowed on 01.04.2024. Till date the
respondent has not complied the orders passed in the said
case nor has she challenged the said order.
5. In the present proceedings, the allegations made
against the respondents do not constitute domestic
violence. In the matrimonial case it has been specifically
stated that respondent had deserted her husband in the
year 2019 whereas the present proceedings has been
initiated by her in year 2021. Accordingly, he prays to
allow the petition.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent has
opposed the petition.
7. In the petition filed by the respondent under section
12 of the Act of 2005, she has stated that her marriage
with the respondent No.1 before the Trial Court namely
Mallikarjun was solemnized on the 19.04.2016. She has
stated that respondent No.1 has contracted a second
NC: 2025:KHC-K:244
marriage with Chennama on 10.09.2021 and she has also
stated that respondents before trial court have neglected
to take care of her.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioners has produced the
certified copy of the judgment and decree passed in
M.C.No.76/2023 by the Jurisdiction Family Court,
Kalaburgi. A reading of the same would go to show that
respondent had allegedly withdrawn from the company of
her husband in the month of January 2019 without any
valid reason and it is in this background Mallikarjun who is
the husband of the respondent had filed a petition under
section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act in M.C.No.76/2023.
Though respondent wife had entered appearance in the
said proceedings, she had failed to file any statement of
objection nor had she cross examined her husband who
was examined as PW.1 in the said proceedings.
9. In M.C.No.76/2023 which was allowed on
01.04.2024, the respondent wife is directed to join the
company of her husband and to lead a marital life.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:244
Learned counsel for the petitioners has brought to the
notice of this court that till date respondent has not joined
her husband nor has she challenged the order passed in
M.C.No.76/2023. Petitioners herein are the parents and
other close relatives of Mallikarjun and by making omnibus
allegations as against them, even they are implicated in
the proceedings initiated by the respondent under section
12 of the Domestic Violence Act. In view of the judgment
and decree passed in M.C.No.76/2023, a serious doubt
arises with regard to the allegations found in the petition
filed under section 12 of the Domestic Violence act by the
respondent. Omnibus allegations are found as against the
respondents herein and it becomes highly doubtful that
such allegations made would amount to domestic violence
for the purpose of initiating proceedings under section 12
of the act as against the petitioners herein.
10. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that
continuation of the impugned criminal proceedings as
NC: 2025:KHC-K:244
against the petitioners would amount to abuse of process
of law. Accordingly, the following order:
ORDER
a) Criminal petition is allowed.
b) The entire proceeds in Crl.Misc.No.1317/2021
before the court of learned Magistrate at Indi,
Vijayapura district under section 12 of the
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence
Act 2005, is quashed against the petitioners
herein.
Sd/-
(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
JUDGE
DHA
CT:PK
