CRL.P. NO.9673/2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.9673 OF 2017 BETWEEN:
1. HARISHA S/O LOKESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS OCCUPATION: TEACHER R/O KOTE CAMP TARIKERE TOWN CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT – 577 228 2. SMT. INDRAMMA W/O LOKESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS OCCUPATION: HOUSE WIFE R/O KOTE CAMP TARIKERE TOWN CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT – 577 228 3. SMT. LAKSHMI W/O MOUNESH AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS OCCUPATION: HOUSE WIFE R/O TARIKERE TOWN CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT – 577 228 4. ANANDA S/O MARULLAPPA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS OCCUPATION: TEACHER R/O KOTE CAMP TARIKERE TOWN CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT – 577 228 … PETITIONERS (BY SHRI DINESH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR SHRI R.B. DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE) CRL.P. NO.9673/2017 AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY TARIKERE POLICE STATION CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT – 577 228 (REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BENGALURU – 560 001) 2. BHAGYA T.A.
D/O ANNAJI GOWDA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS OCCUPATION: TEACHER GOVT. SCHOOL JAMBALE R/O JAMBALE, MUDIGERE TALUK CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT – 577 132 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI S.RACHAIAH, HCGP FOR R.1) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN S.C.NO.71/2017 PENDING ON THE FILE OF 1ST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKAMAGALURU (CHARGE SHEETED FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/Ss 376(N), 341, 506, 417, 420, 504, 323 R/W 34 OF IPC).
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Heard Shri Dinesh Kumar, learned advocate for the petitioners and Shri S. Rachaiah, learned HCGP for the State.
2. Respondent No.2-complainant filed FIR No.229/2015 in Tarikere Police station alleging that petitioner No.1 had promised to marry her about seven CRL.P. NO.9673/2017 and half years prior to the date of filing of the complaint and subsequently, on 08.05.2015, he married somebody else. When complainant went to petitioner’s house, petitioners No.2 to 4 abused her. After investigation, police have filed the charge sheet for offences punishable under Sections 376(N), 341, 506, 417, 420, 504, 323 read with Section 34 of IPC.
3. Shri Dinesh Kumar, learned advocate for the petitioners submits that the contents of the complaint does not justify inclusion of Section 34 of IPC in the charge sheet so far as petitioners No.2 to 4 are concerned.
4. Shri S. Rachaiah, learned HCGP, adverting to the complaint submits that it is specifically averred by the complainant that petitioners No.2 to 4 have abused her when she visited their house.
5. I have carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the records.
CRL.P. NO.9673/2017 6. Shri Rachaiah is right in his submission that complaint contains specific allegations against petitioners. To prove that they are innocent, petitioners have to stand trial.
7. In the circumstances, I see no ground to interfere by exercising the powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Resultantly, this petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed. At this stage, learned advocate for the petitioners prays that all contentions may be left open to be urged before the Trial Court. Accordingly, contentions urged in this petition are kept open.
No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE AV