IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.661 OF 2014 BETWEEN :
1. A MAHENDRA KUMAR S/O T.ANANDA KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/AT NO.29, 5TH MAIN, TEACHERS COLONY, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560034.
2. M R JAGADESHWARI W/O.T.ANANDA KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT NO.29, 5TH MAIN, TEACHERS COLONY, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560034.
..PETITIONERS (BY SRI: SYED QUALEELULLA QUADRI, ADVOCATE) AND 1 KALAIMANI W/O T.MAHENDRA KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/A NO.44, 3RD CROSS, SIDDARTH NAGAR, DR.T.C.M. RAYAN ROAD, BANGALORE-560052.
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ATTIBELE POLICE STATION, ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT 560 009 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SHIVAPRASAD B.R., ADV. FOR SRI M.S.RAGHAVENDRA PRASAD, ADV FOR R.1 SRI VIJAYA KUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. SPP FOR R.2) THIS CRL.P FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.1577/2011 OF ATTIBELE P.S., WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF ADDL. C.J. AND J.M.F.C., ANEKAL.
This petition coming on for Admission this day, the Court made the following :
O R D E R Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned SPP for respondent No.2 and learned counsel for respondent No.1/complainant. Perused the records.
2. Petitioners are accused Nos. 1 and 2 against whom charge sheet is laid for the offences punishable under Section 498A of IPC and Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act read with Section 34 of IPC.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners does not press the petition insofar as accused No.1 is concerned. Accordingly, the petition filed against accused No.1 stands dismissed.
4. Insofar as accused No.2 who is the mother of accused No.1 is concerned, a perusal of the charge sheet discloses that except making general and vague allegation in the charge sheet that accused Nos. 1 and 2 together caused physical and mental cruelty to respondent No.1, all the specific instances of the alleged cruelty and dowry demand are directed only against accused No.1. According to the prosecution, at the time of marriage, the demand for dowry was made by accused No.1 and it is stated that a gold chain and a pair of bangles were given to accused No.1. The further allegation is that after the marriage a sum of Rs.5 lakhs was paid for purchase of a house and that the said allegation also relates to accused No.1. There is no allegation whatsoever insofar as accused No.2 constituting either the offences punishable under Section 498A or 506 of IPC or Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
5. For the above reasons, prosecution of accused No.2 being wholly illegal amounting to abuse of process of Court, the same cannot be allowed to be continued. Accordingly, the petition is allowed in part. The petition filed on behalf of accused No.1 is dismissed. The petition filed by accused No.2 is allowed. The proceedings pending as against accused No.2 in CC NO.1577/2011 are quashed.
Sd/- JUDGE AKC