IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8378/2017 Between:
1. Ganesh Kumar, S/o Venkataramappa, Aged about 35 years, R/at Chikktimasandra Village, Sarjapura Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru District, Working as Constable, Railway State Police, Bengaluru City Railway Station, Bengaluru – 560099.
2. Chinnamma, W/o late Venkataramanappa, Aged about 62 years, R/at Chikktimasandra Village, Sarjapura Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru District, Working as Constable, Railway State Police, Bengaluru City Railway Station, Bengaluru – 560099. ... Petitioners (By Sri.Dilraj Jude Rohit Sequeira, Advocate) And:
1. The State, By Sarjapura Police, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru District – 562 125, Represented by the State Public Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru – 560001.
2. V.Hemavathi, W/o Ganesh Kumar, Age 31 years, R/at Chikkathirupathi Village, Sarjapura Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru District, Bengaluru – 562 125. ... Respondents (By Sri.S.Rachaiah, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to quash the entire charge sheet and further proceedings in connection with CR.No.16/2013 now pending in C.C.No.602/2015 on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dvn.) and J.M.F.C., Anekal, Bengaluru Rural District for the offence punishable under Sections 323 and 498(A) read with 34 of IPC and Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act pertaining to Sarjapura Police Station and etc., This Criminal Petition coming for Admission this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Though matter is listed for admission, by consent of learned counsel appearing for parties, it is taken up for final disposal.
2. Petitioners who have been arraigned as accused in Crime No.16/2013 which is now pending in C.C.No.602/2015 on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Jr. Dvn.) and J.M.F.C, Anekal, Bengaluru Rural District registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 498(A) read with 34 of IPC and Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, are seeking for quashing of said proceedings.
3. It is urged in the petition that complaint in question has been filed by 2nd respondent (wife of accused No.1) to extract money and further contended that 1st petitioner being fed up with the attitude of his wife had made up his mind to initiate divorce proceedings against her before the Family Court, after his request to his wife to join matrimonial home had failed and in order to settle the dispute with the 1st petitioner and to coerce him to come to terms, she has filed a frivolous complaint. Hence, petitioners have prayed for quashing of said proceedings.
4. Learned Additional Government Advocate would support the filing of charge sheet. Prima facie material on hand would disclose that there are sufficient grounds to proceed against petitioners and as such, he prays for dismissal of the petition.
5. A bare reading of the complaint in question and charge sheet material would disclose that there are sufficient grounds to proceed against accused for the offences alleged. On the basis of said material, it cannot be held that it is not a case where matter should not go for trial. In that view of the matter, this Court finds that there is no good ground to entertain this petition. Hence, petition stands rejected.
In view of the dismissal of this Criminal Petition, I.A. No.1/2017 for stay does not survive for consideration.
SD/- JUDGE NBM