IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON' BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.3764 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
Sri.Yatish Kumar, S/o Sri.Sanjay Chauhan, Aged about 30 years, R/at Flat No.203, 1st floor, Saraswati Nivas, Main Church Road, Ulsoor, Bengaluru-560 008. (By Sri.K.S.Ganesha, Advocate) AND:
1. Smt.Kumari Shweta, W/o Sri.Yatish Kumar, Aged about 28 years, C/o Sathish Kumar, Singh, New Thakur Complex, 8th Mile Stone, Tumkur Road, T.Dasarahalli, Bengaluru-560 057.
2. State of Karnataka by Halasuru Police Station, Halasuru, Bengaluru-560 008. (By Sri.S.Rachaiah, HCGP) …Petitioner …Respondents This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure praying to quash the entire proceedings in CC.No.51834/2018 pending on the file of the X ACMM, Bangalore for the offence p/u/s 498A of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of DP Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Admission this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER Heard the Sri.Ganesha, K.S., Learned counsel appearing for petitioner and learned HCGP appearing for respondent-State. Perused the records.
2. Second respondent herein who is the wife of the petitioner lodged a complaint on 25.05.2017 alleging that from day one of her marriage with petitioner she was not only being ill-treated but also harassed with a demand for additional dowry. She also alleged that petitioner had physically assaulted her on 21.05.2017 at 12.30 am. Though in the complaint she had made allegations against other members of the family, jurisdictional police during the investigation have found that petitioner alone herein was responsible for assaulting the first respondent and harassing her with demand for dowry. As such charge-sheet has been filed in CC.No.51834/2018 against petitioner only.
3. Though Sri.K.S.Ganesh, learned counsel appearing for petitioner has made valiant attempt to contend that allegations made in the complaint are bereft of truth and contrary to factual matrix, this Court would not examine the correctness and veracity of charge-sheet material at this stage. It is for the prosecution to prove the guilt of the petitioner beyond reasonable doubt. Perusal of the charge-sheet, it cannot be said that no material is there to proceed against petitioner (Accused No.2).
4. In that view of the matter, this Court finds no good ground to entertain this petition. Hence, petition stands rejected.
It is made clear that no opinion is expressed on the merits of the case. Trial court shall not be influenced by the observations made in this order.
SD/- JUDGE SB