K Rangaraju S/O Late M K Krishnan vs State Of Karnataka on 25 May, 2009

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

K Rangaraju S/O Late M K Krishnan vs State Of Karnataka on 25 May, 2009

Bench: Subhash B.Adi

, 1 -
{N THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MAY 2009
BEFORE

THE I~§()N'}3LE l'v'!R.JUS'I'ICE SUBHASH B.AD!.. _:

 

EETWEEN :

K.Ra31garaj11,

Aged about 83 years,

Sfo late M.K.Krish11aI1,  _

No. 157,] ﬂoor, St.Patrick's Compl::jx~,....

Brigade Road,   "   _  
Bangalore -- 550 025. _    * «...%.PETI'rIoNER

(By SIi.C.V.Nagesh 8:. Sn",  _

AND:   '

1. State ofKé1r!%.ataiqa.   _ _
By the 'Statioii .I}iou-ex: 
Tﬂakﬁagar '£'c;1icc..S*atiQ1i; "
Bamgaloxfe   " p 

. A "Aged"Lab€mt 51 years,
~ V " 1 cr V..V. ,S'i1I__)ba Rae,
" _ T.PVI€$_énut1y Vat :_',.N0.423,J Block,
-- .V7iswa3."A.par"tments, 163* main,
A  B10-ck',j.;.Jaya:uagar,
 - 560 G1 I .. RESPCNBENTS

f V ' {B§y"Sri,_ Héiianappa, HCGP for R4
 'S-1_£ut._NeL'inakshi for Sri.VenkataIeddy, Adv. for R-2}

 This Criminal Petition is ﬁled under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

  to reverse and set aside the order dt..9.11.00 in
.~C.C.No.500'?[()G on the ﬁle of the II AC.1V£M., Bangalore, and

quash the enﬁre proceedings in the case.



  

-3.

This Petition -Gaming on for Oniers this day, the Court made

the following:
0 R D E R

In this Cziminal Petition, peﬁtioner has  for

quashing of the ploceeclings in C.C.No.500"?/2000_ "e.:_f_THv

Additional Chief Metmpoﬁtan NIagiStI'a:¥>;f.:V,>E'}ang;é1iOI'f..: b  <

2. Petitioner is the husband of   1 A

3. Sn". C.V.Nagesh.   Wf;>r 
petitioner submitted 1i}ZlE;lf,~..V I'€Sf3i51fi(ii.;'.f1:'1.VVV'f15.>§£'i  a' oompIajnt.
which was registered in   the Tilak Nagar

Police for an offaziéte-_  Scéﬁﬁon 498-A of the

Indian   of the same, Police aiso ﬁled

charge shé:étL a31d  Wé S, "CV( )I1{1uCiE€1 against the pgtitioner.

   lﬁs fudgment dated 23.6.1993 acquitted

 .21..-,..  ".__In 195$, the petitioner ﬁled M.G.No.624/1993

  of marriage solemnized between the

  petiﬁoner responécnt No.2. The Family Court by its
"  28*' ﬁcbmaxy 2001 ganted decree of divorce: by

VA   the marnag' 6 between the petitioner and respondent

The said decme was questioned by the respondent before 1' f:;:u*s Court in M.F.A.No.1445/2001 and this Court by its judment dated 31" July 2007 conﬁrmed the dacme of divorce. In the meanwhile. again the respondent No.2 filed a complaint V V l . , jzistiﬁcation.

- 3 -

under Season 498-A [PC before the Tilak Nagar Police Station, which was registered as Crime 950.249] 1999 wherein it is alleged that, the petitioner is having illicit relationship with OI}Lt§."G€8ti1a and based on the said complaint, the Police registeifed and charge sheet is ﬁled. He ﬁnther submitted it 498-9; requires allegation of cruelty; l T conduct, which is such that it is tile commit suicide or to cause of of health (whether mental ,9: phy-sisal). of the " wamafn and the contents of the complaint' eves' they do not make out a case falliiig under' He submitted that, the .W_'+1s filed by the petitioner. as an after 3 been filed after six years of the ﬁling of the céise. He submitted that there is no linesteviialil bf)' Show thavtmtlie petitioner has committed an oﬂence Section 498-23 of the IPC. Without there being any lvithout there being any reason, the Police have ﬁled the change sheet. If the trial is conducted mtitioner, it may not result in conviction. petitioﬂer nzmecessaxily suﬁer harassment without there being any He zelied on the judgment of the Apex Court reported in 2002 SCC {CRL) 9171 in the matter of GIRIDHAR SHANKAR TA WADE -93- STATE OF MAIMRASEJTRA and referring , { east:

-4, to pares-18 submitted that, the Apex Court oonsidering the explanation to clause (a) and clause (b) of Section 498-A has not accepted the argument of the Counsel as regard to Vi}'2e"¢meity alieged on the ground that the trial court and féoxiﬂ have conﬁnned that the death was due to the suicide. He also submitted that, drive toi L commit suicide or cause boc1i1y>iI;_1ju1'§; riot the husband is living with wouid not even constitute an offeiice }.':nder'Vt]3e"V;v:31z)vi.sions of Section 4934: of we. 'fihan none of the allegations allegeciaj in tlie Vehoiw Iany harassment of cruelty, which ciriven the oomplainant to commit suicieie A Sub-clause (b) of Section 498-235 is _ not aiizbéeted as"'Lh_efe is ino allegation of dowry harassment. A __ oontraxy. S33:1t.Na1inakshi submitted that. as of divome conﬁxmeei by this Court, a Special V _ Peviiitiioxiiii has been ﬁled before the Apex Court and notice H i beeziissued in the said peﬁﬁon. It is stated that the matter ijeiiigjoending before the Apex Court, this matter be deferred till i ' " -then.

fgfig} -5- Accordixzgly, the Criminai Petition is allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No.500'7/ 2000 stand quashed. KNMI -

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court