Karnataka High Court

Shahin Begum And Ors vs The State And Anr on 6 March, 2025

                                              -1-
                                                          NC: 2025:KHC-K:1486
                                                     CRL.P No. 200873 of 2024




                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

                                      KALABURAGI BENCH

                           DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025

                                            BEFORE
                            THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH


                           CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200873 OF 2024
                                   (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
                   BETWEEN:

                   1.   SHAHIN BEGUM W/O ALLAFAZAL RANJANAGI,
                        AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
                        R/O JAMIYA MASJID, NALWAR, TQ: CHITTAPUR.

                   2.   JAMEER PATIL S/O ALLA PATEL HOSAMANI,
                        AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
                        R/O TIPPU NAGAR, TALIKOTI, DIST: VIJAYAPUR.

                   3.   HANEEFA BEGUM W/O DASTGIR PATEL,
                        AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
                        R/O SAIDAPUR, DIST: YADGIRI.
Digitally signed
by RENUKA          4.   AMEEN PATEL S/O ALLA PATEL,
Location: HIGH          AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA               R/O TIPPU NAGAR, TALIKOTI, DIST: VIJAYAPUR.

                                                               ...PETITIONERS

                   (BY SRI G. G. CHAGASHETTI, ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   1.   THE STATE THROUGH,
                        WADI PS, REPRESENTED BY,
                        THE ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
                        HIGH COURT BUILDING,
                        KALABURAGI-585101.
                                -2-
                                          NC: 2025:KHC-K:1486
                                     CRL.P No. 200873 of 2024




2.   BABAN BEE W/O LATE SULEMAN PATEL,
     NOW W/O DASTGEER SAB GUTTEDAR,
     (SECOND MARRIAGE),
     AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
     R/O TIPPU NAGAR, TALIKOTI,
     AT PRESENT R/O KUNNUR,
     TQ: AND DIST: KALABURAGI-585102.

                                              ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI GOPALKRISHNA B. YADAV, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI RAMACHANDRA K., ADVOCATE FOR R2)

      THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO A) QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET
NO.150/2021 DATED 06.12.2021 FILED BY THE WADI PS,
REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTIONS 498(A), 323, 504, 506 READ WITH SECTION 34 OF
IPC, CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CC
NO.478/2022, PENDING ON THE FILE OF LEARNED CIVIL
JUDGE AND JMFC AT SHAHABAD.


    THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM:    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH


                        ORAL ORDER

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH)

Though the matter is listed for admission, with the

consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is

taken up for final disposal.

NC: 2025:KHC-K:1486

2. This petition is filed by the accused to quash the

charge sheet in Crime No.150/2021, registered by the

Wadi Police Station, for the offences punishable under

Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC.

3. It is the case of the prosecution that respondent

No.2 was the wife of late Suleman Patel. The said Suleman

Patel died on 21.09.2020 in the road accident. Thereafter,

she started residing in the house of her parents' house.

There were some allegations made against the petitioners

that they were harassing her in one or the other pretext.

Further, she has stated in her complaint that, on

02.10.2021 at about 10-00 a.m. all the petitioners had

been to the house of her parents and when they were

talking with each other, the maternal uncle of the

complainant asked the petitioners to take her back to the

matrimonial home. By the time, all the petitioners had

assaulted the complainant and also abused her by using

filthy language. Therefore, a complaint came to be

registered before the jurisdictional police. The

NC: 2025:KHC-K:1486

jurisdictional police have registered the case in Crime

No.150/2021 for the offences stated supra. After

conducting the investigation, they have submitted the

charge sheet.

4. Heard Sri G. G. Chagashetti, learned counsel for

the petitioners and Sri Gopalkrishna B. Yadav, learned

High Court Government Pleader for the respondent/State.

5. It is the submission of the learned counsel for

the petitioners that the allegations made against the

petitioners are baseless, bald and omnibus in nature. From

the date of death of the husband of the complainant, the

complainant started residing with her parents. No

allegations were made prior to the death of her husband.

The complainant intentionally filed a complaint only in

order to harass the petitioners.

6. It is further submitted that on reading the

entire charge sheet averments, no case is made out

against the petitioners in respect of the offences

mentioned in the charge sheet. Though the investigating

NC: 2025:KHC-K:1486

officer conducted the investigation in respect of the

offence under Section 323 of IPC, no wound certificate is

produced to substantiate the said provision. Since the

averments of the charge sheet do not disclose case

against the petitioners, asking them to face the trial would

be an abuse of process of law and also it is a futile

exercise. Therefore, the petition may be allowed and the

charge sheet has to be quashed.

7. To substantiate his arguments, he relied on the

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of

Kahkashan Kausar and Others v. State of Bihar and

Others, reported (2022) 6 SCC 599.

8. Per contra, learned High Court Government

Pleader vehemently justified the registration of the FIR

and filing of the charge sheet. He further submitted that

the investigating officer had conducted the investigation

and submitted the charge sheet. The averments of the

complaint and also averments of the charge sheet are

required to be dealt with in a trial. At this stage, it would

NC: 2025:KHC-K:1486

not be appropriate to quash the proceedings when there

are serious allegations are made out against the

petitioners. Making such submissions, he prays to dismiss

the petition.

9. Having heard the learned counsel for the

respective parties, it is appropriate to extract the relevant

paragraphs of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court

in the case of Kahkashan Kausar supra, which read as

under:

"13. Previously, in the landmark judgment of this Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar [Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 :

(2014) 3 SCC (Cri) 449] , it was also observed :

(SCC p. 276, para 4)

"4. There is a phenomenal increase in matrimonial disputes in recent years. The institution of marriage is greatly revered in this country. Section 498-AIPC 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-AIPC is a cognizable and non-bailable offence has lent it a dubious place of pride amongst the provisions that are used as weapons

NC: 2025:KHC-K:1486

rather than shield by disgruntled wives. The simplest way to harass is to get the husband and his relatives arrested under this provision. In quite a number of cases, bedridden grandfathers and grandmothers of the husbands, their sisters living abroad for decades are arrested."

14. Further in Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand [Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand, (2010) 7 SCC 667 : (2010) 3 SCC (Cri) 473] , it has also been observed : (SCC pp. 676-77, paras 32-36)

"32. It is a matter of common experience that most of these complaints under Section 498-

AIPC are filed in the heat of the moment over trivial issues without proper deliberations. We come across a large number of such complaints which are not even bona fide and are filed with oblique motive. At the same time, rapid increase in the number of genuine cases of dowry harassment is also a matter of serious concern.

"33. The learned members of the Bar have enormous social responsibility and obligation to ensure that the social fibre of family life is not ruined or demolished. They must ensure that exaggerated versions of small incidents should not be reflected in the criminal complaints. Majority of the complaints are filed either on their advice or with their concurrence. The learned members of the Bar who belong to a noble

NC: 2025:KHC-K:1486

profession must maintain its noble traditions and should treat every complaint under Section 498- A as a basic human problem and must make serious endeavour to help the parties in arriving at an amicable resolution of that human problem. They must discharge their duties to the best of their abilities to ensure that social fibre, peace and tranquillity of the society remains intact. The members of the Bar should also ensure that one complaint should not lead to multiple cases.

34. Unfortunately, at the time of filing of the complaint the implications and consequences are not properly visualised by the complainant that such complaint can lead to insurmountable harassment, agony and pain to the complainant, accused and his close relations.

35. The ultimate object of justice is to find out the truth and punish the guilty and protect the innocent. To find out the truth is a Herculean task in majority of these complaints. The tendency of implicating the husband and all his immediate relations is also not uncommon. At times, even after the conclusion of the criminal trial, it is difficult to ascertain the real truth. The courts have to be extremely careful and cautious in dealing with these complaints and must take pragmatic realities into consideration while dealing with matrimonial cases. The allegations

NC: 2025:KHC-K:1486

of harassment of husband's close relations who had been living in different cities and never visited or rarely visited the place where the complainant resided would have an entirely different complexion. The allegations of the complaint are required to be scrutinised with great care and circumspection.

36. Experience reveals that long and protracted criminal trials lead to rancour, acrimony and bitterness in the relationship amongst the parties. It is also a matter of common knowledge that in cases filed by the complainant if the husband or the husband's relations had to remain in jail even for a few days, it would ruin the chances of an amicable settlement altogether. The process of suffering is extremely long and painful."

16. Recently, in K. Subba Rao v. State of Telangana [K. Subba Rao v. State of Telangana, (2018) 14 SCC 452 : (2019) 1 SCC (Cri) 605] , it was also observed that : (SCC p. 454, para 6)

"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."

- 10 -

NC: 2025:KHC-K:1486

10. On careful reading of the dictum of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court, it makes clear that the roping the in-laws

in a criminal case with a malafide intention, has to be

viewed leniently if there are bald and baseless allegations

found in the averments of the charge sheet.

11. In the present case, the respondent No.2 after

death of her husband, started residing with her parents.

Though she had made several allegations against the

petitioners, the entire allegations are omnibus in nature

and even if the said allegations are subjected for trial, in