IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MAY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9117 OF 2017 BETWEEN:
1. Smt.Nagarathna.K.V, W/o.Late T.V.Somasundar, Aged about 65 years, Resident of Lakshmi Nivas, 1st Floor, 5th Cross, 9th Main, Siddarameshwara Extension, Tumkuru-572103.
2. T.S.Arun, S/o.Late T.V.Somasundar, Aged about 33 years, Resident of No.129, 4th Cross, 1st Main, South Avenue Layout, Gottigere, Bengaluru-560 083.
3. Smt.T.S.Supriya, W/o.Mahesh, D/o.Late.T.V.Somasundar, Aged about 29 years, Resident of C.P.Main Road, Opp.Old Post Office, Vijayapura, Chikkamangaluru-577 101. …Petitioners (By Sri.H.Malatesh, Advocate) AND:
1. State of Karnataka, Represented by Station House Officer, Women Police Station, Tumkuru Town, Tumkuru-572 103.
2. Smt.B.N.Geetha, W/o.Kiran Kumar, Major, R/o.Shivashree Hale, Gurupuru, H.H.Road, Shivamogga Taluk, Shivamogga-577 201. … Respondents (By Sri.S.Rachaiah, HCGP for R-1) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to quash the entire proceedings initiated against the petitioners in C.C.No.123/2016 (Cr.No.28/2016) pending on the file of the learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Tumkuru vide Annexure-A.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Admission, this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Sri.H.Malatesh, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Sri.S.Rachaiah, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1.
The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
2. In this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Code’ for short), the petitioners inter alia have sought for quashment of the proceedings initiated against them in C.C.No.123/2016 pending on the file of II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Tumakuru for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 504, 506, 323 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader.
4. Admittedly, charge sheet has been filed against the petitioners on 15.07.2016. After filing of the charge sheet, period of more than two years has elapsed. Therefore, in the fact situation of the case, I am not inclined to exercise the powers under Section 482 of the Code as this Court in exercise of inherent powers cannot appreciate the materials contained in the charge sheet and record a finding one way or the other.
5. However, it will be open to the petitioners to argue before the trial Court on the question with regard to framing of charge.
6. Needless to state that in case the petitioners are aggrieved, they shall be at liberty to file Criminal Revision Petition before this Court.
With the aforesaid liberty, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE dn/-