IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6882/2018 BETWEEN:
1. SRI.C.P.MANJUNATHA S/O. C.N.PREM KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS 2. SMT. M.SOWMYA W/O.P.C.MANJUNATH, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, PRESENTLY R/AT NO.47 (102B), 38TH CROSS, 9TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE-560069 BOTH ARE PERMANENT RESIDENTS OF NO.7/442C, SWAMY VIVEKANANDA ROAD, SOUTHERN EXTENSION, KOLLEGAL-571440 ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI.MANJUNATHA M.V., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CHAMARAJPET POLICE STATION, BENGALURU REP. BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE-560001 2. SMT. PRAVEENA K.G. W/O.C.P.VENKATESH BABU D/O.GOPAL, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.9/10, 2ND CROSS, 2ND MAIN, VITTAL NAGAR, CHAMARAJPET, BENGALURU-560 018 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.R.V.ANAND, ADVOCATE FOR R-2; SRI.S.RACHAIAH, HCGP FOR R-1) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER 482 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.27390/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE XXIV A.C.M.M., BANGALORE, (CR.NO.118/2016 OF CHAMARAJPET P.S., BANGALORE) AGAINST THESE PETITIONERS.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Petitioners, who have been arraigned as accused Nos.2 and 3 in C.C.No.27390/2016 for the offences punishable under Section 498A, 506 r/w Section 34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, by Chamarajpet Police Station pending on the file of XXIV Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bangalore, are before this Court for quashing of said proceedings.
2. None appears for the petitioners. I have heard the arguments of Sri.S.Rachaiah, learned HCGP appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri.R.V.Anand, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2/complainant.
3. Marriage of second respondent and brother of first petitioner came to be solemnised on 07.02.1999 and out of said wedlock, two children are born. On account of differences of opinion having arisen between second respondent and her husband–C.P.Venkatesh Babu, she is said to be residing at her parental home after leaving the matrimonial home at Kollegala. She has alleged in her complaint that there was a demand for additional dowry from her husband and parents-in- law. A bare reading of complaint dated 06.06.2016 – Annexure-B would clearly indicate that there is not even a whisper regarding alleged threat of demand for dowry by petitioners namely, her brother-in-law and sister-in-law.
4. Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of RAJESH SHARMA vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH reported in AIR 2017 SC 3869 has issued directions to be followed by the investigating officers where such complaints are received namely, to ascertain as to whether there is any truth in the said complaint and to find out the complicity of each of the accused person against whom allegations are made in the complaint. In the instant case, first respondent-jurisdictional police is said to have filed the charge sheet in C.C.No.27390/2016 against the husband of second respondent and petitioners herein for the offence punishable under Section 498A, 506 R/W Section 34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. When the complainant herself has not made any allegation in the complaint with regard to alleged demand of dowry by the petitioners and when undisputedly petitioners have been residing at Bangalore, when second respondent/complainant and her husband were residents of Kollegala at which point of time alleged incident took place, question of petitioners harassing second respondent had not at all arisen and even in the complaint there is no such allegation made against the present petitioners.
5. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered view that continuation of proceedings against petitioners would be an abuse of process of law and continuation of it would not be in the interest of justice.
Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER (i) Criminal petition is hereby allowed.
(ii) Proceedings pending in C.C.No.27390/2016 on the file of XXIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bangalore, against petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC, is hereby quashed.
(iii) Petitioners are acquitted of the said offences.
SD/- JUDGE DR