IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION No. 5561 /2016 BETWEEN:
1. Shivanna S/o Late Siddaiah, Aged about 60 years, 2. Smt.Indiramma W/o Shivanna, Aged about 48 years, Both are residing at Kommanahalli Village, Mandya Taluk, Mandya District – 571 403.
(By Ms.Raksha Keerthana.K, Advocate for Sri.Kemparaju, Advocate) AND:
1. State of Karnataka by Byatarayanapura Police Station, Rep. by its State Public Prosecutor, High Court Building, Bengaluru – 560 001.
2. Chikkathayamma W/o Kumar, ... Petitioners Aged about 40 years, R/at Agasanapura Village, Malavalli Taluk, Mandya District – 571 407.
... Respondents (By Sri.Vijayakumar Majage, Addl.SPP for R1; Smt.Babita and Sri.Shaik Saeed, Advocates for R2) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying to quash the charge sheet filed by the respondent No.1 in C.C.No.11976/2014 for the offence P/U/S 306 read with 34 of IPC, pending on the file of the III ACMM, Bengaluru.
This Criminal petition coming on for Admission, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R On behalf of petitioner No.1/accused No.2 death certificate is produced to show that the petitioner No.1/accused No.2 died on 27.01.2018. Hence, the prosecution against petitioner No.1/accused No.2 is dismissed as abated.
2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner No.2/accused No.3, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1 and counsel for respondent No.2. Perused the records.
3. A reading of the charge sheet discloses that all the allegations constituting the offences under Sections 306 read with 34 of IPC are directed only against accused No.1. According to the prosecution, the engagement of accused No.1 with the deceased-Lavanya had taken place on 27.05.2012. It is alleged that on account of non payment of dowry demanded by the accused, marriage has been postponed. According to the prosecution on 25.09.2013 at 9.30 A.M accused No.1 called the deceased over phone asking her not to go for work. When the deceased was proceeding to take bath, accused No.1 is stated to have gone to her house and took gold ornaments belonging to the deceased and demanded her to pay additional dowry demanded by them and failing which, he provoked the deceased to pour kerosene oil and die and accordingly, the deceased is alleged to have poured kerosene oil on her and committed suicide.
4. The above averments clearly go to show that the petitioners herein had no role whatsoever in the alleged act of provocation or in the deceased committing suicide. The allegations made in the complaint and the charge sheet even if accepted as true would go to show that immediate provocation, if any, was given by accused No.1 and not the petitioners. In the said circumstances, prosecution of the petitioners for the alleged offence is baseless, illegal and unsustainable.
For the above reasons, petition is allowed. The charge sheet and consequent proceedings pending against the petitioner No.2/accused No.3 in C.C No.11976/2014 on the file of III A.C.M.M, Bengaluru are quashed.
Sd/- JUDGE UN