IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2809 OF 2015 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2865 OF 2016 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7237 OF 2014 IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2809 OF 2015 BETWEEN:
1. S NANJUNDASWAMY S/O SRI N. SREEKANTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, 2. MANGALA W/O S. NANJUNDA SWAMY, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.19, BLOCK NO.25, S.B.M. COLONY, SRIRAMPURA II STAGE, MYSURU CITY 570023 (BY SRI: S G BHAGAVAN, ADVOCATE) AND 1. POOJA KONANUR VISHWANATH W/O SRI SHASHANK NANJUNDASWAMY, ... PETITIONERS MAJOR, NO.334, 2ND "B" CROSS, GIRINAGAR, 1ST PHASE, BANGALORE 560085 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE, GIRINAGAR POLICE STATION, BANGALORE 560085 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI: G.BALAKRISHNA SHASTRY, ADV FOR R1-ABSENT; SRI: VIJAYA KUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. SPP FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN FIR IN CRIME NO.180/2014, DATED 14.09.2014 REGISTERED BY THE POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR GIRINAGAR POLICE STATION, BENGALURU-560 085 FOR AN OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 498(A) OF THE IPC IN SO FAR AS THEY AS ACCUSED NOS.2 AND 3 ARE CONCERNED.
IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2865 OF 2016 BETWEEN:
SHASHANK NANJUNDASWAMY (A1) 32 YEARS, NO 63, PARK ROAD, BRENTWOOD ESSEX, CM 144 TU, UNITED KINGDOM (BY SRI: S G BHAGAVAN, ADVOCATE) ... PETITIONER AND 1. POOJA KONANUR VISHWANATH D/O SRI KONANUR VISHWANATH AGE: 27 YEARS NO 334, 2ND B CROSS, GIRINAGAR, 1ST PHASE, BANGALORE- 560085 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE OFFICER IN CHARGE GIRINAGAR POLICE STATION BANGALORE - 560085 ... RESPONDENTS (R1-SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED;
SRI: VIJAYA KUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. SPP FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN F.I.R. IN CR.NO.0180/2014, DATED 14.09.2014, REGISTERED BY THE POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR GIRINAGAR POLICE STATION, BANGALORE-560085 FOR AN OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 498(A) OF THE I.P.C. IN SO FAR AS ACCUSED NO.1 IS CONCERNED.
IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7237 OF 2014 BETWEEN:
1. SHRUTHI BELAVADI W/O DR PRASHANTH BELAVADI, 36 YEARS, NO.70, PRINCE GEORGE AVENUE, OAKWOOD LONDON, (UNITED KINGDOM), PIN CODE:N 14 4SP, 2. DR PRASHANTH BELAVADI S/O SRI B NANJUNDESWARA, 41 YEARS NO.70, PRINCE GEORGE AVENUE, OAKWOOD LONDON (UNITED KINGDOM), PIN CODE:N14 4SP (BY SRI: S G BHAGAVAN, ADVOCATE) AND 1. POOJA KONANUR VISHWANATH W/O SRI SHASHANK NANJUNDASWAMY, MAJOR NO.334, 2ND “B” CROSS, GIRINAGAR 1ST PHASE, BANGALORE-560 085.
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE OFFICER IN-CHARGE, GIRINAGAR POLICE STATION, BANGALORE-560 085.
... PETITIONERS ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI: G.BALAKRISHNA SHASTRY, ADV FOR R1-ABSENT; SRI: VIJAYA KUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. SPP FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN FIR IN CRIME NO.180/14 DATED:14.9.14 REGISTERED BY THE POLICE SUB- INSPECTOR GIRINAGAR POLICE STATION, BANGALORE -85, FOR AN OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 498A OF IPC IN SO FAR AS THEY AS ACCUSED NOS. 4 AND 5 ARE CONCERNED.
THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R These three petitions are filed by accused Nos.1 to 5 respectively seeking to quash the proceedings initiated against them in Cr.No.180/2014 for the offences punishable under section 498A of Indian Penal Code.
Heard learned for the petitioners and learned Addl. SPP appearing for respondent No.2.
Learned counsel for respondent No.1 is absent and has not addressed any arguments. Perused the records.
Respondent No.1 is served and unrepresented in Crl.P.No.2865/2016.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners at the outset would submit that except the marriage that had taken place in India on 17.04.2013, all other instances of cruelty are alleged to have been perpetrated on the complainant while she was residing with accused No.1 and other accused persons in United Kingdom and therefore, none of the alleged offence having been committed within the territorial limits of Indian Courts, institution of the proceedings against the petitioners is legally untenable and are liable to be quashed.
3. Learned Addl. SPP however would submit that there are allegations in the complaint that the marriage records itself were ante-dated and while the husband/accused No.1 had come to India on 08.12.2013, he used to mentally harass and threaten the complainant not to inform her parents and his parents about the mental and physical torture that she underwent with accused No.1 in United Kingdom and therefore the proceedings are maintainable in the Courts of Bengaluru.
Considered the submissions. Perused the records.
4. A reading of the complaint indicates that respondent No.1 and accused No.1 got married in India on 17.04.2013. After marriage, both of them left to United Kingdom on 1.05.2013. Learned counsel for the petitioners has produced the certificate of entitlement of a decree passed by the Family Court at ROMFORD, 2a Oaklands Avenue, Romford, United Kingdom. It discloses that the marriage between respondent No.1 and accused No.1 is annulled on 17th June 2014. That apart, the allegations made in the complaint disclose that all the instances of alleged cruelty had taken place in United Kingdom where the complainant was residing with her husband. Except stating that when her husband had come to India on 8.12.2013, he threatened her not to disclose the said instances of cruelty to her parents, said allegation does not attract the offence under section 498A Indian Penal Code. The allegations made in the complaint, if accepted as true would only indicate that the offence has been committed beyond the territorial limits of Indian Courts.
5. Section 188 of Cr.P.C. provides that when an offence is committed outside India- (a) by a citizen of India, whether on the high seas or elsewhere; or (b) by a person, not being such citizen, on any ship or aircraft registered in India, he may be dealt with in respect of such offence as if it had been committed at any place within India at which he may be found: Provided that, notwithstanding anything in any of the preceding sections of this Chapter, no such offence shall be inquired into or tried in India except with the previous sanction of the Central Government.
6. Since the material on record prima facie disclose that the alleged offence had taken place in United Kingdom, institution of the proceedings against the petitioners for the alleged offence cannot be maintained without the previous sanction of the Central Government. As a result, the petitions deserve to be allowed.
6. Accordingly, the petitions are allowed. The proceedings initiated against the petitioners in Cr.No.180/2014 are quashed.
Liberty is reserved to respondent No.1 to proceed against the petitioners on the same cause of action after obtaining permission in terms of Section 188 of Cr.P.C.
Sd/-
JUDGE *mn/-