IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION No.7753/2013 BETWEEN:
1. Smt. S. Anitha, W/o. S. Nagesh, Aged about 40 years, R/at No.179, N.N.T. Road North side, Chinthamani, Chikkaballapura – 563 125.
2. Smt. Sowmya S., W/o. Basavarajachari M.V., Aged about 34 years, R/at 13/114/2, 3rd Cross, Kaverinagar, Kathriguppe, BSK III Stage, Kathriguppe, Bengaluru – 560 085. ... Petitioners (By Sri. P. Basavaraju, Advocate) AND:
1. State, By Tavarekere Police Station, Bengaluru.
Rep. by State Public Prosecutor, High Court building, Bengaluru – 560 001.
2. Smt. C.N. Jyothilakshmi, W/o. Ravikumar, C/o. Jayalakshmamma, R/at No.56, 4th Cross, Maruthi Nagar, Arishinakunte, Nelamangala, Bengaluru – 562 123. ... Respondents (By Sri. Vijayakumar Majage, Addl. SPP for R1; Sri. Javeed S., Advocate for R2) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to (a) set aside the order dated 18.11.2013 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru in C.C.No.3349/2010 vide Annexure-G and allow the application, as prayed for, vide Annexure-H; (b) quash the FIR in Crime No.163/2010 and charge sheet in C.C.No.3349/2010 pending on the file of the C.J.M., Bengaluru, vide Annexure-A and C, respectively.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Admission, this day, the court made the following:
O R D E R Petitioners are accused Nos.4 and 5 in the charge sheet laid against them for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 498(A), 324, 506 r/w 149 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
2. Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned Addl. SPP for respondent No.1 and learned counsel for respondent No.2.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are married ladies and they never resided with respondent No.2 at any time in the matrimonial house and hence, there was no occasion for the petitioners to subject the complainant/respondent No.2 to cruelty and harassment; petitioners are falsely implicated in the alleged offences; Wound Certificate produced by the prosecution clearly indicate that assault was made by the husband and mother-in-law. There are no incriminating evidence against the petitioners and hence, prosecution of the petitioners is wholly illegal and an abuse of process of Court. He further submitted that the instant complaint is filed after accused No.1 filed divorce petition against respondent No.2 and after presentation of the petition for restitution of conjugal rights. All these circumstances, therefore suggest that implication of the petitioners in the alleged offence is patently illegal and malafide and therefore, the impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed insofar as the petitioners are concerned.
4. Learned Addl. SPP appearing for respondent No.1 and learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 have argued in support of the impugned action contending that prima-facie material is produced in proof of the involvement of the petitioners in the events that had taken place in the matrimonial house on 17.04.2010. Hence, there is no reason to quash the FIR and Charge Sheet.
5. I have carefully gone through the accusations made in the FIR and the Charge Sheet and documents filed along with it. There is prima-facie material to show that insofar as the incident dated 17.04.2010 is concerned, petitioners were also present during the occurrence. No doubt it is true that in the Wound Certificate, the complainant/respondent No.2 has named only her husband and mother-in-law, but having regard to the specific accusations made against the petitioners, solely on that ground, the proceedings filed against the petitioners cannot be quashed. As the material collected by the Investigating Agency prima-facie disclose the involvement of the petitioners in the alleged offences, I do not find any justifiable ground to quash the proceedings. Moreover, the discharge application filed by the petitioners before the trial Court has already been rejected.
For the above reasons, petition is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE sv