IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5309 OF 2017 BETWEEN:
1. Sri.Syed Abbas, S/o Syed Jaffar, Aged about 39 years, R/at Kalidasanagara, Harihara Town, Davanagere Dist 577 001.
2. Sri.Syed Shoukhath, S/o Syed Jaffar, Aged about 41 years, R/at Kalidasanagara, Harihara Town, Davanagere Dist 577 001.
3. Sri.Syed Jaffar, S/o Syed Ahamadulla, Aged about 69 years, R/at Kalidasanagara, Harihara Town, Davanagere Dist 577 001.
4. Sri.Karim Khan, S/o Ahmed Khan, Aged about 33 years, R/at Kalidasanagara, Harihara Town, Davanagere Dist 577 001.
5. Sri.Shafiulla, S/o Abdul Hamid Saba Kilyada, Aged about 47 years, R/at Kalidasanagara, Harihara Town, Davanagere Dist 577 001.
(By Sri.Naveen Aradhya.S., Advocate for Sri.Harish Bhandary.T. Advocate ) AND:
1. State of Karnataka, By Yashwanthpura Police Station, Bengaluru.
Represented by State Public Prosecutor, High Court Buildings, Bengaluru-560001.
2 Smt. Naseera Begam, W/o Syed Abbas, Aged about 26 years, No.5, 3rd Cross, Near Masjid, Mohan Kumar Nagara, Yeshwanthpura, Bengaluru City, Karnataka-560022.
(By Sri.Sandesh Chouta , SPP for R1) …Petitioners …Respondents This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying to quash the entire proceedings in CC.No.11489/2017 (Crime No.310/2016) of Yeshwanthapura Police Station, Bengaluru) on the file of the XXIV ACMM, Bengaluru registered by the first respondent police for the offence P/U/S 143, 341, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Admission, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER Heard Sri.Naveen Aradhya.S learned counsel appearing for Sri.Harish Bhandary.T., for petitioners and Sri.Sandesh Chouta, learned SPP appearing for respondent No.1-State and perused the records.
2. Petitioners who have been arraigned as accused Nos.1 to 3 and 8, 9 in C.C.No.11489/2017 (Crime No.310/2016 registered by Yashwanthpura Police Station, Bengaluru) for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 341, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of IPC pending on the file of XXIV A.C.M.M. Bengaluru, are seeking for quashing of said proceedings, contending inter- alia that respondent No.2 has filed a false complaint and charge against accused No.4 to 7 have been dropped after investigation by the jurisdictional police and this would only indicate that allegations made in complaint are fabricated and as such, proceedings initiated against petitioners be quashed.
3. Per contra, learned SPP would support the initiation of prosecution against petitioners contending inter-alia that after investigation came to be conducted, it was found that petitioners had not only abused the complainant which she had lodged against petitioners but had also threatened her to withdraw the same and they had assaulted respondent No.2 herein which indicates that matter has to be thrashed out after trial. Hence, he prays for rejection of the petition.
4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and on perusal of the records, it would disclose that petitioner No.1 married respondent No.2 herein on 04.01.2017 at Madhugiri Taluk, Tumkur District and on account of certain disputes having arisen between them, respondent No.2 herein lodged a complaint against petitioner No.1 and other family members alleging that she had been subjected to cruelty and said complaint came to be registered in Crime No.12/2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 354A, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. For the purposes of attending the said case, when complainant is said to have visited Court at Harihara on 09.08.2016, petitioners are said to have abused her and had also threatened her. As such, complainant is said to have informed the Harihara Town Police Station by lodging a complaint. Subsequently, on 12.08.2016 at 6.30 PM, petitioners alongwith others are said to have visited the house of complainant-respondent No.2 and picked up a quarrel with her and had forced her to withdraw the case pending before Harihara Court and had also threatened her and the family members of respondent No.2, the consequences that would ensue in the event of witnesses appearing before Court to tender evidence against petitioners. Hence, respondent No.2 lodged a complaint before Yashwanthpura Police Station against petitioners, which came to be registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 341, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of IPC and after investigation, accused Nos.4 to7 have been dropped and prosecution has proceeded to file charge sheet against the petitioners. Though it is contended that there was no such incident which took place on 12.08.2016, in the light of charges having been filed after investigation, burden is on the prosecution to prove the occurrence of said incident to drive home the guilt of the accused. At this stage, probable defence that would be raised by petitioners during trial would not be examined by this Court. In that view of the matter, this Court finds there is no merit in this criminal petition and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, criminal petition is hereby dismissed.
In view of dismissal of criminal petition, IA.No.1/2017 for stay would not survive for consideration and hence, it is hereby dismissed.
SD/- JUDGE SB