[Cites 10, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Siddaraju vs The State Of Karnataka on 3 February, 2026
Author: S Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:6165
CRL.RP No. 241 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 241 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
1. SIDDARAJU
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS
S/O MAHADEVEGOWDA.
2. SMT. GEETHA
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
W/O NAHADEVEGOWDA.
3. MAHADEVEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
S/O MOOGEGOWDA.
PETITIONERS NO.1 TO 3 ARE
R/AT HARAVE VILLAGE
CHAMARAJANAGARA TALUK
CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT - 571 128
PRESENTLY R/A NO.12
SNEHASAGAR VILAS
8TH MARUTHI CROSS ROAD
Digitally signed NEHRU LAYOUT
by NANDINI M
S RAMAMURTHY NAGAR
Location: HIGH BENGALURU - 560 016.
COURT OF ...PETITIONERS
KARNATAKA
(BY SRI P. NATARAJU, ADV. FOR P1 & P2;
PETITION AS AGAINST P3 DISMISSED AS
ABATED V/O DATED 03.02.2026)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY CHAMARAJANAGARA RURAL POLICE STATION
CHAMARAJANAGARA
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:6165
CRL.RP No. 241 of 2023
HC-KAR
2. SMT. MAMATHA
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS
W/O MAHADEVASWAMY
R/A HARAVE VILLAGE
CHAMARAJANAGARA TALUK
CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT - 571 128.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP FOR R-1;
R-2 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C PRAYING TO
SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 01.12.2022 IN S.C.NO.4/2021
PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE AT CHAMARAJANAGARA ON THE APPLICATION FILED U/S.227
OF CRPC IN FAR AS RELATES TO THE OFFENCE
P/U/S.376,323,324,417 R/W SEC.34 OF IPC AND ALLOW THE
APPLICATION ON ITS FILE IN ITs ENTIRETY AS PRAYED FOR BY
ALLOWING THIS REVISION PETITION.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
ORAL ORDER
1. Accused Nos.1 to 3 are before this Court in this revision
petition filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of
Cr.P.C. with a prayer to set-aside the order dated 01.12.2022
passed in SC No.4/2021 by the Court of Principal District and
Sessions Judge, Chamarajanagar, rejecting the application of
the petitioners filed under Section 227 of Cr.P.C.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
NC: 2026:KHC:6165
HC-KAR
3. Petitioners herein were charge sheeted for the offences
punishable under Sections 342, 376, 323, 324, 417, 498 read
with Section 34 of IPC in Crime No.157/2019 registered by
Chamarajanagar Rural Police Station, Chamarajanagar, based
on the first information dated 03.07.2019 submitted by
respondent No.2 herein, who is the alleged victim in the
present case. After committal of the case to the jurisdictional
Court of Sessions Judge at Chamarajanagar, the Sessions Case
in SC No.4/2021 was registered against the petitioners and in
the said proceedings, an application under Section 227 of
Cr.P.C. was filed on behalf of the petitioners with a prayer to
discharge them of the charge sheeted offences. The said
application was opposed by the prosecution by filing objections.
The learned Sessions Judge vide the impugned order dated
01.12.2022 had partly allowed the application filed by the
petitioners under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. and had discharged
them for the offences punishable under Sections 342, 498 read
with Section 34 of IPC and had rejected their prayer for
discharge for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 323,
324, 417 read with Section 34 of IPC. It is under these
circumstances, petitioners are before this Court.
NC: 2026:KHC:6165
HC-KAR
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners having reiterated the
grounds urged in the petition submits that victim lady was
already married earlier to one Mahadevaswami of the very
same village. Subsequently, she left her husband and started
staying with accused No.1 in his house and they lived together
for a period of seven months. Mahadevaswami had not filed
any police complaint in this regard. The material on record
would go to show that prior to the FIR in the present case,
respondent No.2 herein had approached the police and
submitted a complaint on 03.07.2019 and in the said
complaint, no allegations were made against accused Nos.1 and
3, which would attract the charge sheeted offences. Only after
accused No.1 refused to marry the victim lady, who was
already married, a false complaint has been lodged. He submits
that even if the allegations found in the first information are
presumed to be prima facie true, the charge sheeted offences
cannot be made out against the accused. The Trial Court has
failed to appreciate this aspect of the matter and has erred in
refusing to discharge the petitioners of the charge sheeted
offences.
NC: 2026:KHC:6165
HC-KAR
5. Per contra, learned HCGP has argued in support of the
impugned order and submits that Trial Court after perusal of
the available material on record has rightly passed the
impugned order and the same does not call for any
interference. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition.
6. Perusal of the material on record would go to show that,
marriage of respondent No.2, who is the alleged victim in the
present case, was performed with one Mahadevaswami, S/o
Maregowda of Harave Village, Chamarajanagara Taluk. First
informant and her parents are originally the residents of
Chikkatti Village of Gundlupete Taluk. After marriage, the first
informant was staying in her husband's house at Harave
Village, Chamarajanagara Taluk. During the course of her stay
in her husband's house, she got acquainted to accused No.1
Siddaraju and in the first information, it is alleged that accused
No.1 proposed to the first informant to marry him and she had
refused the said proposal on the ground that she was already
married. Allegation against accused No.1 is that subsequently
he had once again approached the first informant when she
was in her parents' house and by making her believe that he
NC: 2026:KHC:6165
HC-KAR
will marry her, he had taken her along with him and kept her in
a room. When the first informant asked accused No.1 to marry
her, he allegedly informed her that he would marry her only if
his parents agree for the same. It is under these
circumstances, first informant allegedly approached accused
Nos.2 and 3, who are the parents of accused No.1 and accused
Nos.2 and 3 allegedly refused to perform marriage of accused
No.1 with the first informant and they also allegedly abused
and assaulted the victim lady. She has stated that it is under
these circumstances, on the morning of 03.07.2019, she had
gone to the police station and had complained against the
accused. The police had summoned accused No.1 - Siddaraju,
but he had not agreed to take her back and marry her.
Therefore, for the purpose of threatening the accused persons,
she had consumed rat poison and thereafter, accused No.1 had
taken her with him to his house at Bengaluru and he allegedly
committed sexual assault on her in the said house. It is under
these circumstances, FIR was registered against accused Nos. 1
to 3 in Crime No.157/2019. After completing investigation,
charge sheet was filed against accused Nos.1 to 3, for the
aforesaid offences.
NC: 2026:KHC:6165
HC-KAR
7. The material on record would go to show that prior to the
victim lady approaching the police on 03.07.2019, she had filed
a complaint on 19.06.2019 before the Women Police Station,
Chamarajanagar, alleging that after her marriage, she got
acquainted with accused No.1 and they started loving each
other. Therefore, she had abandoned her husband and gone
with him. Subsequently, Begur Police had summoned her along
with accused No.1 and her husband Mahadevawamy and after
enquiry, she had gone along with Siddaraju and his parents.
Subsequently, parents of Siddaraju had refused to perform her
marriage with Siddaraju and therefore, she had once again
approached the police on 19.06.2019 and had made a request
to summon Mahadevaswamy and Siddaraju and advise them.
In the complaint which was submitted by the first informant on
19.06.2019, she has not made any allegation which is now
made by her against accused Nos.1 to 3 in her complaint dated
03.07.2019.
8. First informant is a married lady and from her wedlock
with Mahadevswamy, the couple have a child aged about 4
years. As per the averments found in the complaint dated
NC: 2026:KHC:6165
HC-KAR
19.06.2019, after giving birth to the child, she had developed
relationship with Siddaraju and had gone along with him,
abandoning her husband and child. She has stayed with
accused No.1 Siddaraju and his family members for a period of
seven months. No complaint was lodged by her husband or by
her parents in the meanwhile. Only after Siddaraju refused to
marry her, the first informant has approached the police. From
the aforesaid aspects of the matter, it is very clear that this is a
clear case of abuse of process of law and necessary ingredients
to attract the charge sheeted offences is prima facie absent in
the present case. The Trial Court was therefore, not justified in
rejecting the application of the petitioners filed under Section
227 of Cr.P.C. insofar as it relates to the offences punishable
under Sections 376, 323, 324, 417 read with Section 34 of IPC
are concerned. Accordingly, the following order:-
9. The Criminal Revision Petition is allowed. The impugned
order dated 01.12.2022 passed in SC No.4/2021 by the Court
of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chamarajanagar, is
set-aside and the application filed by the petitioners under
NC: 2026:KHC:6165
HC-KAR
Section 227 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. Petitioners are discharged of
the charge sheeted offences.
Sd/-
(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
JUDGE
DN
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 69
