IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.129 OF 2016 BETWEEN:
MRS. ZAIBUNNISA W/O AMEER JAN AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/AT 5TH MAIN ROAD NEAR NEELAKANTESHWARA TEMPLE CHAMUNDINAGARA, R.T.NAGAR POST BENGALURU - 560 032 … PETITIONER (BY SHRI SHAKEEL AHMED, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER ULSOORGATE WOMEN POLICE STATION BENGALURU-02 2. SMT. NAZATHUNNISA W/O BABAJAN AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.344 AKKAPPA GARDEN HUSSAIN MANSION ROAD MOHAN KUMAR NAGAR YESHWANTPUR BENGALURU - 560 022 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B.G. NAMITHA MAHESH, HCGP FOR R.1; NOTICE TO R.2 – SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS WHICH HAVE BEEN INITIATED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT ULSOOR GATE WOMEN P.S., BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.15213/2008 AGAINST THE PETITIONER PENDING BEFORE THE HON'BLE VI ADDL.C.M.M., TRAFFIC COURT, BENGALURU.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Heard Shri Shakeel Ahmed, learned advocate for the petitioner and Smt. B.G. Namitha Mahesh, learned HCGP for the State.
2. Respondent No.2 registered FIR No.11/2008 in Halsurgate Women Police Station on 15.03.2008 alleging offences punishable under Section 498A of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Police, after investigation have filed charge sheet. Petitioner is complainant’s mother-in-law and she has filed this petition seeking quashing of criminal proceedings against her.
3. Learned advocate for the petitioner, adverting to the complaint, submits that there is no allegation against the petitioner. He pointed out that in the type written complaint, the petitioner’s name and names of her two daughters have been written in ink which gives an impression that those names have been added subsequently only to harass them. He argued that complaint does not contain any allegations against petitioner and her daughters. He placed reliance on order dated 31.10.2015 in CRL.P.No.4831/2015, wherein this Court has allowed the petition and quashed proceedings so far as petitioner’s daughters are concerned, who were arraigned as accused Nos.4 and 5 on the ground that allegations are omnibus in nature.
4. Learned HCGP argued in support of the charge sheet.
5. I have carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the records.
6. Learned advocate for the petitioner is right in his submission that the complaint is type written and names of the petitioner and her daughters have been written in pen in the spaces, which were kept blank. Reading of the complaint in its entirety does not disclose any overt-acts on the part of petitioner. This Court having opined that the allegations are omnibus in nature, has quashed criminal proceedings against accused Nos.4 and 5. Petitioner also stands on the same footing.
7. In the circumstances, this petition merits consideration and it is accordingly allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No.15213/2008 pending on the file of VI A.C.M.M., Bengaluru, are quashed so far as the petitioner is concerned.
No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE AV