Karnataka High Court
Mr. Vivek George Jacob vs State Of Karnataka on 27 March, 2024
Author: K.Natarajan
Bench: K.Natarajan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
WRIT PETITION NO.29273 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
1 . MR. VIVEK GEORGE JACOB
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
S/O MR. GEORGE JACOB,
R/AT B 1102,
QUEENSGATE,
HOUSE OF HIRANANDANI,
BEGUR VILLAGE,
BEGUR,
BENGALURU CITY,
KARNATAKA - 560 078.
2 . MR. GEORGE JACOB
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS,
R/AT NO.10/377,
THOPPIL, UTHIMOODU P.O.,
RANNI,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT,
KERALA - 689 672.
3 . MRS. SUNITA JACOB
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
W/O MR. GEORGE JACOB,
R/AT NO.10/377,
THOPPIL, UTHIMOODU P.O.,
RANNI,
2
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT,
KERALA - 689 672.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.B.V. SHANKARA NARAYANA RAO, SENIOR
COUNSEL FOR;
SRI. T.A.CHANDRASEKHARA, ADVOCATE AND
SRI. KRISHNA D., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
PUTTENAHALLI POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU - 560 078.
2. MRS. ELIZABETH GEORGE
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
W/O VIVEK GEORGE JACOB,
R/AT A-905, MAYFLOWER BLOCK,
BRIGADE MILLENNIUM, J.P.NAGAR,
7TH PHASE, BENGLAURU - 560 078.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R1;
SMT. JAYNA KOTHANI, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRT. NAVEEN CHANDRA V., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH
SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO
i) CALL FOR RECORDS IN CRIME NO.0351/2023
REGISTERED BY R1 POLICE ON THE FILE OF 30TH ADDL.
CMM COURT, BANGALORE CITY. ii) QUASH THE FIR IN
CRIME NO.0351/2023 REGISTERED BY R1 POLICE
(ANNEXURE-G) PENDING ON THE FILE OF 30TH ADDL. CMM
COURT, BANGALORE CITY, CONSEQUENTLY QUASHING ALL
FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN PURSUANCE THEREOF.
THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 07.03.2024 THIS DAY, THE
COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:
3
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 for quashing the FIR in Crime No.351/2022 registered by the Puttenhalli police station, Bangalore. During the pendency of the petition, charge sheet was filed for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 504, 506, read with 34 of IPC.
2. Heard the arguments of learned senior counsel for the petitioners, also learned senior counsel appearing for respondent No.2 and learned HCGP for the State.
3. The case of the prosecution is that, on the complaint filed by the respondent No.2, police registered FIR. It is alleged by her that she married petitioner No.1 on 07.02.2013 in Hyderabad. Thereafter, they came and stayed at Bangalore for the work purpose. The parents of the petitioner/accused no.1, have demanded dowry from the respondent No.2. Accordingly, they gave Rs.25 lakhs to accused Nos.1 to 3 in different installments by way of transfer of the amount through bank. When they came to 4 Bangalore, they resided in rented house. Subsequently, the accused No.1 started controlling the finance of the respondent No.2. She had bank account at HDFC Bank, Koramangala Branch and a joint account in State Bank of India, Koramangala. Both the accounts were operated by accused No.1. The debit card of the respondent No.1 from HDFC bank was also operated by the accused No.1. He has not allowed to access her bank account. It is further alleged in 2014 that the accused No.1 and respondent No.2 had jointly purchased a flat at Mayflower Block Brigade Millennium, JP Nagar, Bengaluru. The entire salary of respondent No.2 was transferred to joint account and her money was used for EMI. The accused No.1 also forced her to bring Rs.15 lakhs from her parents, but her father could not pay entire amount. Her father paid only Rs.13,90,000/. A sum of Rs.12 lakhs by way of transfer and Rs.1,90,000/- through HDFC Bank Account of the respondent No.2. Even thereafter, the accused No.1 abused her in filthy language for not arranging the entire amount . 5
4. Subsequently, a child was born in 2015. The accused Nos.1 and 2 forced her to quit the job and during that time, the accused persons ill treated her physically and mentally and harassed her by using vulgar words and they also humiliated her. On 26.4.2019, she received Rs.66,752/- from provident fund, which was credited to her account in HDFC BANK. The same was immediately transferred by accused No.1, to his account and started abusing her. The accused also financially abused her, he was always after her money, salary and provident fund. She further alleges in 2019, the loan was borrowed for purchasing the flat at J.P. Nagar, Bangalore, which has been cleared and her father also given the money. She further alleged that they jointly decided to purchase 3 BHK Apartment at Bannerghatta road and again he has demanded Rs.15,00,000/- from her and repeatedly harassed her. The said apartment was registered in the joint name, she has contributed the money towards the purchase. Inspite of the same, the accused No.1 and his mother harassed her and constantly demanded money of 6 Rs.11,53,000/- which was paid by her father. The accused No.1 himself got transferred Rs.5,89,825/- from her and her father. On 18.6.2020, amount of Rs.9,89,825/- was transferred from the joint account to Prestige group towards the payment of purchase of the apartment. It is further alleged that during 2020 lockdown, she has observed unusual and shocking behaviour of the accused No.1. He used to sit in the bathroom late night and he used to cry loudly and shout. He has threatened her and her child. The accused No.2 was clearly well aware that the accused No.1 suffered from mental issues which was suppressed by her. In September 2020, the accused No.1 decided to go to Kerala and forced her to go to Kerala, though she was not willing due to Covid-19 lockdown, but he has forcibly took her with him. He has assaulted her and he has dashed his head to the wall and threatened her to come along with him, then she travelled along with him. They reached her father's house at Kerala. The next day they were getting ready and were preparing to go to his parents house, but the accused No.2 telephoned him. Subsequently, he has 7 told, he is going to his parents house alone and that she should stay at her parents house with the child. She further alleges, that she used to call accused No.1 everyday and requested him to leave Kerala and go to Bangalore, but he did not agree. Hence, they lived in Kerala separately. The accused No.1-husband had left her and the son in her parent's house alone. The mother of accused No.1 made several false accusation against her and abused her in filthy language. In March, 2021, she has started working at 'Deloitte' on a contract basis and was working from home. They resided in Kerala for two years, during that time, she stayed with her parents and accused No.1 came to his parents house and then he came back to Bangalore in May- 2022. They came to Bangalore, by that time, the accused No.1 had installed CCTV camera in the hall.
5. It is further alleged in 2022, she was having lunch with her son, the accused No.1 came shouting at her, threw the plate and she had to leave the house and with no choice stayed in neighbours house for sometime. Hence, she was 8 forced to go to the police station. The accused No.1 packed his belongings and told her son that, he would never have a father and left the home. Her son was traumatized and due to sudden outburst of accused No.1, both were left in the house alone. However, accused no.1 came back by next day. The accused no.1 abused herself and her parents and house maid. Several occasions he has tried to discuss with accused No.1 to settle the issues amicably, but always accused No.1 responded with anger by abusing her in July, 2022. However, when she was having dinner, she brought the issues of amicable settlement. The accused No.1, abused her and her parents about their character. He threw the food on the walls. On 08.02.2023, the accused No.1 sent email stating that he was leaving the house. Therefore, in February 2023, he left the house and was residing separately. He has not made any payment or any maintenance towards the respondent No.1 and the child. It was extremely difficult to meet her day to day affairs. The parents of respondent No.2 was also not in a position to financially support her.
9
6. She further alleges in February 2023, where the accused No.1 left the house on 1.11.2023 at 10 a.m., the accused Nos.2 and 3, barged into the house without her permission, sat on the sofa and started shouting and screaming at her and she was scared. The accused No.3 started recording the video on his phone, which has made respondent No.2, extremely uncomfortable. When she was crying they started going through all the rooms and shouting at her. Her son was also scared and family was not with her to support her, then she called the security and requested accused Nos.1 to 3 to leave the house. But they refused to go out, despite her protest, the accused Nos.1 and 3 remained in the apartment and moved around the house including her bed room where she kept jewelleries and they started mishandling her things, which amounts to trespass and violated her privacy. The accused Nos.1 and 2 took the photographs and videos without her consent. Hence, she called the Puttenhalli Police Station and two police constable came to the house. She informed them about the incident, then police asked them to come to the 10 police station. The ruckus and chaos created by them near the house which embarrassed her and caused loss of reputation. In the police station, the accused No.3 again threatened her and shouted at her saying that they along with the accused No.1 was going back to apartment and are staying there. The police officer arrived and parents of the accused No.1 were asked by the police to stop harassing her, she was afraid of her safety. She was mentally traumatised by the accused Nos.1 to 3. The accused Nos.1 to 3 remained in her apartment, even though accused No.1 had left the home in February 2023, but the accused No.2 and 3 trespassed the house and criminally intimated due to which, she has suffered mental shock and they demanded huge money as dowry. Also physically and verbally abused her. Therefore, prayed for taking action against the accused persons.
7. Police registered the FIR against accused Nos.1 to 3, while the same was challenged before the court and during the pendency, the police have filed charge sheet, which is also challenged by the counsel .
11
8. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner seriously contended that there is no proper allegation against the petitioner for having committed the offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC. There is no specific overt act against the accused persons. The ingredients of section 498A of IPC is not attracted. The parents i.e, accused Nos.2 and 3, coming to the house of accused No.1 will not amount to trespass, the house which was in the joint name of accused No.1 and respondent No.2. Therefore, none of the offences are made out by the respondent No.2 for continuing the proceedings against the petitioners. Hence, prayed for quashing the criminal proceedings. Learned senior counsel further contended, the allegations are omnibus allegation, property were purchased in joint name. There is no wound certificate, though accused No.1 said to be assaulted. Therefore, question of continuing the proceedings amounts to abuse of process of law. Hence, prayed for quashing the Criminal proceedings. 12
9. On the other hand, senior counsel appearing for the respondent No.2, seriously objected and contended that there was continuous harassment by the accused No.1, both financially and mentally. The accused Nos.2 and 3 also came and harassed the complainant at Bangalore on 1.11.2023. They created ruckus and assaulted her which attracts sections 448, 323 and 498A of IPC. Merely there is no wound certificate, that itself is not a ground for quashing the criminal proceedings. There is no omnibus allegations but they are all specific allegations. The accused No.1 tortured and extracted money from her parents and had purchased two flats in their joint name. The respondent No.2 had paid money from her salary accounts and also from her father. Inspite of the same, the accused persons harassed her in filthy languages and there was continuous harassment on the victim. Therefore, case is made out to going for the trial. The CCTV footage video record were all seized by the police. Hence, prayed for dismissing the petition.
13
10. Having heard the arguments, perused the record. On perusal of the very complaint, there is a lengthy complaint made by the respondent No.2, where the petitioners have demanded dowry prior to the marriage and the father of respondent No.2., have paid Rs.25 lakhs. Subsequently, the accused No.1 continuously demanding money and received money from respondent No.2 and he has purchased the flats in joint name. However, he has demanded money from her father and received it on various dates. There was continuous mental and financial abuse from the accused No.1 and even after birth of the child, the accused No.1 continuously harassed her for the payment from respondent No.2 and purchased flats. Documents were also produced especially bank account extract which reveals that the accused No.1 had received the money from the respondent No.2 continuously and also from her father. Ofcourse, he has purchased two flats in joint names, but he has continuously, financially abused the respondent No.2 and there was quarrel between them even after going to the Kerala and staying there for two years during lockdown. 14 The accused No.1 had left her and he was staying with his parents.
11. Until 01.11.2023, there was no specific allegations against accused Nos.2 and 3, except demand and acceptance of dowry prior to the marriage. Thereafter, on 1.11.2023 accused No.2 and 3 came to the house of accused No.1 and respondent No.2, where they both were residing, but their son, accused No1 was not in the house and they started video graphing the house, which was objected by the respondent No.2., inspite of the same, the respondent Nos.2 and 3 continuously took the video graphs in the house. Therefore, she has called the security guard and asked these petitioners to leave. Later, she telephoned to the police, the police came and took all of them to the police station and subsequently complaint came to be filed. On perusal of the complaint and the charge sheet, which reveals there is continuous harassment by the accused No.1 on the respondent no.2. However, though there was demand in earlier stage of the marriage, but the accused 15 Nos.2 and 3 stayed in Kerala and during the lockdown the accused No.1 and respondent No.2 went to Kerala. The respondent No.2 resided separately and after two years they came back to Bangalore. Most of the allegations are against the accused No.1, who frequently demanded money from the respondent No.2 and her parents which was paid by them, out of the said amount he has purchased two flats in the joint name and maximum amount wast contributed by the complainant.
12. The main complaint against accused Nos.2 and 3 was on 1.11.2023, where the accused Nos.2 and 3 came inside the house by ringing the bell and the complainant says that they barged into the house and were video graphing the house without her permission, thereby they trespassed the house. In my considered opinion when the parents-in-law come into the house of their son, where the house belongs to the daughter-in-law and son, which was jointly purchased, it cannot be treated as a trespass by the parents-in-law into their own sons house. As regards to the 16 video graph through mobile phone, it is alleged that it was taken without her permission. It is pertinent to note that the accused Nos.2 and 3 came from Kerala from a remote village of Pathanamthitta district. They came to Bangalore, Brigade Millennium Apartment which is a beautiful apartment, therefore, they might have video graphed the building and the location and house, that cannot be ground to say they harassed the complainant. Therefore, I hold that the parents coming to the house of their own son, which was jointly owned by her son and daughter-in-law, does not amount to a trespass and even a permission of the daughter-in-law is not required to enter into the house. Even if they take photograph, in the house it cannot be considered as criminal intention. They have only taken the photo and it cannot amount to cruelty. Even if they go inside the bed room of their son, then they need not require permission of the daughter-in-law. Therefore, the contention of the respondent No.2, is that there was cruelty by accused Nos.2 and 3 and they trespassed the house on 1.11.2023, which cannot be an offence at all, to bring under the 17 purview of section 498A of IPC. All the time, the accused No.1 and respondent No.2 stayed at Bangalore and she never stayed at house of the accused Nos.2 and 3 at Kerala. Therefore, continuing any proceedings against accused Nos.2 an 3 is nothing but abuse of process of law, but there is incriminating material against accused No.1 for having committed the offence. Therefore, the Criminal proceedings against accused Nos.2 and 3 is liable to be quashed.
Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following; The petition is allowed in part.
The petition filed by the accused No.1 is hereby dismissed.
Consequently, the further proceedings against accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crime No.351/2022 registered by the Puttenhalli police station, Bangalore, pending on the file of 30th ACMM, Bengaluru, is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE AKV CT:SK