IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.781 OF 2014 BETWEEN:
1. SMT.PARVATHAMMA W/O SHIVALINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS R/O CHIKKAMALALI VILLAGE CHANNAGIRI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 213.
2. SRI SHIVALINGAPPA S/O CHANNABASAPPA AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS R/O CHIKKAMALALI VILLAGE CHANNAGIRI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 213.
3. SRI CHANDRASHEKARA S/O SHIVALINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS NO.9, SUDAKARASHETTY BUILDING KAMMASANDRA VINAYAKANAGAR ELECTRONIC CITY BENGALURU-560 100.
4. SRI MALLIKAPPA S/O SHIVALINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/O KAGGI VILLAGE CHANNAGIRI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 213.
5. SMT.ANNAPURNAMMA D/O SHIVALINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/O DASIKATTE VILLAGE RAMGIRI HOBLI HOLALKERE TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 526.
…PETITIONERS (BY SRI S G RAJENDRA REDDY, ADV.) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CHANNAGIRI POLICE STATION CHANNAGIRI BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001.
2. SMT.SHRUTHI@BINDU W/O K.S.KUMARA AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS R/O CHIKKAMALALI VILLAGE CHANNAGIRI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 213.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VIJAYA KUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. SPP. FOR R-1 SRI A.D.RAMANANDA, ADV. FOR R-2- ABSENT) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT AND FIR IN CRIME NO.508/2013 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT CHANNAGIRI POLICE, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 498A, 342, 149 OF IPC AND SEC. 3, 4 OF D.P. ACT 1961, PENDNG ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHANNAGIRI, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT IN RESPECT OF THE PETITIONERS HEREIN AND ETC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioners are accused Nos.2 to 6 in Crime No.508/2013 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 342 read with Section 149 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
2. The complainant – Smt.Shruthi @ Bindu is the wife of the accused No.1. She married accused No.1 on 22.11.2009. According to her, at the time of marriage, a cash of Rs.1,50,000/- and 10 tholas of gold were given to accused No.1 and thereafter, she was residing in the matrimonial home and at that time, she was subjected to ill-treatment and harassment by the petitioners. In the complaint, it is alleged that accused No.1 was demanding additional dowry from her and for not satisfying the said demand, she was confined in the room for days together without giving any food and water. In the complaint, she has stated that on 04.09.2013, at about 7.00 p.m. when she was on her way to Channagiri, accused No.1 pushed her from the bike and snatched four tholas of chain worn by her and also assaulted and threatened her. Insofar as the petitioners herein are concerned, common and general allegations are made stating that the petitioners herein were also ill-treating and harassing her. The complainant has not cited any specific instance of cruelty or harassment by any of the petitioners making out the offence under Sections 498-A, 342 read with Section 149 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has pointed out that much before the lodging the above complaint, accused No.3 himself had lodged a complaint against the complainant and her parents in Crime No.366/2013. In the said complaint, it was alleged that on 04.09.2013 at about 8.30 p.m., the complainant namely, Smt.Shruthi, her parents and uncle came to the house of accused No.3 and forced him to transfer the immovable properties in the name of the complainant and on account of his refusal, he was assaulted and abused by the complainant – Shruthi and other accused named therein. This FIR was registered on 04.09.2013, on the very date of incident and the statement of accused No.3 was recorded in the hospital thereby, lending credence to the incident alleged in the said complaint. Whereas, the instant complaint is lodged on 24.12.2013. Except stating that on earlier occasions, the complainant was subjected to ill-treatment and harassment by the petitioners and her husband, this complaint does not disclose any cause of action leading to the prosecution of the petitioners herein for the above offences.
4. The circumstances narrated above clearly indicate that the instant complaint is a sequel to the complaint lodged by accused No.3 against the second respondent / complainant. The allegations made in the instant complaint indicate that it is an after thought and a vindictive attempt by second respondent calculated to implicate the entire family members of accused No.1 in false charges. The complaint lodged by the second respondent before the Child and Women Welfare Department goes to show that she had no grievance whatsoever against the petitioners herein. In the said complaint, she had merely alleged that her husband was ill-treating and harassing her. There is not even a remote reference of the petitioners herein in the said complaint that the petitioners were subjecting her to any ill- treatment, cruelty in the matrimonial house. Thus, it is evident, that the allegations made in the instant complaint are malafide, vexations apart from being false and mischievous. As the material on record discloses that the criminal proceedings initiated by the respondent are manifestly attended with malafides and are maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wrecking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge, the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is required to be exercised to secure the ends of justice and to prevent the abuse of process of Court.
5. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The proceedings initiated against the petitioners namely, accused Nos.2 to 6 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 342 read with Section 149 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 in Crime No.508/2013, are hereby quashed.
Sd/- JUDGE VMB