IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7082/2016 BETWEEN:
1. ALWYN NATHANIEL S/O LATE DR. D. GURURATHNA, AGED 44 YEARS, 2. MRS. VIMALA SHANTHA KUMARI W/O LATE DR. D. GURURATHNA, AGED 77 YEARS, 3. MRS. HONEY ALIAS TANUJA W/O SRI EDWARD SHAM PRASAD, AGED 49 YEARS, 4. EDWARD SHAM PRASAD S/O LATE M JAYARATHNA, AGED 54 YEARS, ALL RESIDING AT NO. 55, BENSON CROSS ROAD, BENSON TOWN, BENGALURU - 560 046. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI S.G. BHAGAVAN, ADVOCATE) AND 1. SMT. M. P. SUMAN D/O S.L.PUTTAMADAIAH, (ADVOCATE) AGED 38 YEARS, H.NO. 1851, 7TH CROSS, SUBASH NAGARA, MANDYA - 571 401.
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE STATE HOUSE OFFICER, MANDYA WEST POLICE STATION, MANDYA - 571 401. ... RESPONDENTS (BY MS. NALINA K, ADVOCATE FOR R1 SRI VIJAYA KUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. SPP FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.1684/2014 PENDING IN THE COURT OF THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MANDYA.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Petitioners are aggrieved by the proceedings initiated against them in C.C.No.1684/2014 for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 420, 114, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC.
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for respondents. Perused the records.
3. Respondent No.1 herein lodged a complaint against the petitioners on 17.07.2014. In the complaint, it is stated that she came in acquaintance with petitioner No.1 herein in 1997 during her college studies and since then, they carried on close relationship which gradually developed into sexual relationship, but later the petitioner married with another woman.
4. Reading of the charge sheet indicates that petitioner No.1 as well as respondent No.1 were in physical relationship since 1997. Complaint came to be lodged 17 years after the alleged acquaintance, even though in the complaint, it is stated that they were carrying on sexual relationship since then.
5. From the reading of the charge sheet, it could be gathered that only when petitioner No.1 refused to marry respondent No.1, the instant complaint appears to have been filed. The complaint does not disclose any elements of cheating or deception attracting the ingredients of Section 417 of IPC. The complaint discloses that she was staying in the house of petitioner No.1 and during this time with her consent, petitioner No.1 was having sexual intercourse with her. It is her statement that both of them were sleeping together in one room and were taking all necessary precautions to avoid pregnancy. This statement virtually rules out the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC. Under the said circumstances, prosecution of the petitioners on the basis of the said allegations would be nothing but an abuse of process of Court. The allegations made in the complaint and in the charge sheet even, if accepted uncontroverted, do not constitute the elements of the offences punishable under Sections 417, 420, 506, 114 read with Section 34 of IPC. The complaint is manifestly attended with malafides and obliquely motivated. As a result, the same is liable to be quashed.
Accordingly, petition is allowed. Proceedings in C.C.No.1684/2014 pending on the file of Additional Civil Judge and J.M.F.C, Mandya for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 420, 114, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC are hereby quashed.
PYR Sd/- JUDGE