Karnataka High Court
Sri Srinivas G S/O Gangadhar, Prasad vs State Of Karnataka on 20 December, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:18572
CRL.P No. 102684 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.102684 OF 2024
(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
SRI SRINIVAS G. S/O. GANGADHAR PRASAD,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/O. AT NO.936, TANK BUND ROAD,
INDIRA NAGARA, ITTIGEGUDU,
MYSURU-570010.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI S. RUPESH KUMAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY MAHILA POLICE STATION (HUBBALLI NORTH),
DHARWAD DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY THE
LEARNED STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
DHARWAD-580011.
Digitally signed by 2. SMT. KUSUMA SUBEDAR,
MOHANKUMAR B AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
SHELAR W/O. HANUMANTHASINGH SUBEDHAR,
Location: HIGH R/O. 2ND MAIN ROAD, SHIVAGIRI,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA DHARWAD-580007.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI PRAVEENA Y.DEVAREDDIYAVAR, HCGP, FOR R1;
R2 DECEASED)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 528 OF
BNSS, (UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C.) SEEKING TO QUASH THE
PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE II ACJ AND JMFC-II, DHARWAD, IN
C.C.NO.1321/2010 FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/SEC. 498(A), 304(B)
R/W SEC. 34 OF IPC AND SEC. 3 AND 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION
ACT AS PER ANNEXURE-F IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:18572
CRL.P No. 102684 of 2024
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI) Petitioner who is arraigned as accused No.1 has filed petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him in C.C.1321/2010 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 304B r/w Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
2. In support of the petition, the petitioner has contended that he has not committed the alleged offences and has been falsely implicated. Though petitioner residing in the same address along with his mother (accused No.2), he was not aware of the proceedings pending in Dharwad court. Since the case was spilt up against the petitioner, he was wrongly informed that case against him is dismissed and he is not required to attend the court. Therefore, he remained absent in all the further -3- NC: 2024:KHC-D:18572 CRL.P No. 102684 of 2024 proceedings in S.C.No.101/2010 and C.C.No.1321/2010. Respondent No.1 police did not inform him about the spilt up chare sheet and the summons was not served on him in the spilt up chare sheet.
2.1 Recently, petitioner came to be know about the pendency of the proceedings through his previous advocate and was not only surprised but also shocked. S.C.No.101/2010 was disposed of during 2011 in a full- fledged trial. None of the witnesses have supported the prosecution and ultimately the mother (accused No.2) of the petitioner was acquitted. The petitioner has been residing in the same address for the last 20-25 years. There was no intimation to him about the pendency of the criminal proceedings. In the above facts and circumstances, the continuation of the case would be waste of valuable time of the court and hence, the petition.
3. In support of the petition, petitioner has reiled upon the following decisions.
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:18572 CRL.P No. 102684 of 2024
i) Anil Prakash Pinto vs State of Karnataka and Another (Anil Prakash)1.
ii) Iqlaq Khureshi vs State of Karnataka and Another (Iqlaq Khureshi)2.
4. Learned HCGP representing the State submitted oral objections stating that the third daughter of the complainant by name Rajashree was given in marriage to petitioner who is resident of Mysore. The marriage was performed by spending huge amount. A gold bracelet weighing 4 tola and gold ring weighing 8 grams and cash of Rs.10,000/- for purchasing clothes and also additional sum of Rs.10,000/-was paid for transportation of relatives of the bridegroom to attend the marriage and marriage was performed by spending Rs.25,000/-. After the marriage, Rajashree was living with petitioner and his mother.
1 Crl.P.NO.10936/2024 (DD 28.11.2024) 2 Crl.P.No.2404/2022 (DD 16.09.2022) -5- NC: 2024:KHC-D:18572 CRL.P No. 102684 of 2024 4.1 About 4 months after the marriage, Rajashree came to her parental home during Ashada month and disclosed that both petitioner and his mother (accused No.2) harass and ill-treat her saying that she is not good looking and she do not know cooking and that she is having problem with her eyesight. After the ashada month, the petitioner failed to take back Rajashree. However, the son of the complainant took her back her to the matrimonial home and came back. After 13 days, suddenly, Rajashree came to the parental home and disclosed that after she returned to the matrimonial home, petitioner did not come back and his mother (accused No.2) consistently harassed and forced her to leave the matrimonial home.
4.2 After Deepavali festival, complainant along with her another daughter Arati and elder of the family Baburao took Rajashree to her matrimonial home. However, the petitioner and his mother refused to take her in to the matrimonial home. Without any other go, they brought -6- NC: 2024:KHC-D:18572 CRL.P No. 102684 of 2024 back Rajashree. In fact a petition was given to the Family Counselling Centre, Dharwad and even though the petitioner was summoned, he did not agree to take her back. Rajashree disclosed that the intention of the petitioner is to marry some other lady and therefore, he is harassing her. Unable to bear the harassment and the fact that petitioner and his mother are not ready to take her into the matrimonial home, on 18.04.2009, Rajashree committed suicide and hence, the complaint.
4.3 Based on the complaint, the concerned police registered the case the in crime No.23/2009 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 304B r/w Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of D.P.Act against the petitioner and his mother in C.C.No.149/2010. During the crime stage, petitioner and his mother (accused Nos.1 and 2) secured anticipatory bail in Crl.P.No.7613/2009. During the committal stage, petitioner absconded and therefore, as per the order dated 18.06.2010 in C.C.No.149/2010 a separate case came to be registered -7- NC: 2024:KHC-D:18572 CRL.P No. 102684 of 2024 against the petitioner in C.C.No.1321/2010. Only the case of his mother (accused No.2) was committed to the court of sessions and she faced the trial in S.C.No.101/2010 and ultimately, she was acquitted on 27.05.2011.
4.4 The learned HCGP would further submit that as claimed by the petitioner himself, even though he was staying with his mother, who was accused No.2 and who faced the trial in the same address, he managed to evade the process of the court and after making several attempts in C.C.No.1321/2010, the committal court recorded the evidences of some of witnesses under Section 299 of Cr.P.C. and the case was sent to LPR and NBW was kept on issuing against him.
4.5 After the acquittal of his mother (accused No.2), now the petitioner has come up with this petition seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings. Petitioner is making mockery of the entire judicial system by claiming that even though he was living with accused No.2 and despite the fact that the case registered against him and -8- NC: 2024:KHC-D:18572 CRL.P No. 102684 of 2024 his mother regarding suicide committed by his wife, now the petitioner is claiming that he was not aware of the said proceedings and that he was under an impression that case against him has been dismissed. Under above facts and circumstances, the petition is liable to be dismissed and pray to dismiss the same.
5. Heard arguments and perused the record.
6. As evident from the charge sheet averments, the marriage of the petitioner and deceased Rajashree took place on 07.02.2007 and at the time of marriage, the accused persons including the petitioner demanded and received gold bracelet weighing 4 tola and gold ring weighing 8 grams and cash of Rs.10,000/- for purchasing clothes and also additional sum of Rs.10,000/-was paid for transportation of relatives of the bridegroom to attend the marriage and marriage was performed by spending Rs.25,000/-. However, Rajasree was harassed and ill- treated for not being good looking i.e., she was short and was also having some problem in her eyesight. -9-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:18572 CRL.P No. 102684 of 2024
7. After four months of the marriage, when she went back to her parental home for Ashada, the accused persons including the petitioner did not take her back. After 1½ months, the son of the complainant left the Rajashree in the matrimonial home. However, within 13 days, she was sent back and she disclosed that after she went to the matrimonial home, petitioner did not come to home and his mother (accused No.2) forced her to leave the matrimonial home. Unable to bear the harassment and the insult of driving her out of the matrimonial home, Rajashree committed suicide.
8. In respect of the said incident, complaint came to be field by mother of Rajashree. On the basis of it, crime No.23/2009 was registered. In fact, petitioner and her mother together have secured anticipatory bail in Crl.P.No.7613/2009. After conclusion of the investigation, charge sheet came to be filed against petitioner and his mother (accused No.2) in C.C.No.149/2010. Since petitioner absconded, the committal court ordered for split
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:18572 CRL.P No. 102684 of 2024 up charge sheet against him and committed the case to the court of sessions, sofar as accused No.2 is concerned. It was registered in S.C.No.101/2010 and trial was held. From the date of filing of the charge sheet, till date the committal court is issuing process against the petitioner for his arrest.
9. Sofar as petitioner is concerned, a spilt up charge was filed against him in C.C.No.1321/2010. The order sheet reveals that from 26.07.2010, non-bailable warrants and proclamation came to be issued against the petitioner. The proclamation is also executed. As per order dated 29.03.2012, the case was posted for recording evidence under Section 299 of Cr.P.C. In fact, some of the witnesses are examined under Section 299 of Cr.P.C. The committal court continues to issue non-bailable warrants against the petitioner.
10. Now out of the blue, the petitioner has surfaced and come up with this petition seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings on the ground that continuation of
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:18572 CRL.P No. 102684 of 2024 the proceedings would be waste of precious time of the courts. The petitioner admits the fact that he was staying in the same address shown in the charge sheet along with his aged mother (accused No.2). While his aged mother is attending the court, he expressed ignorance that such a case is pending against him. As rightly, submitted by the learned HCGP, when wife of the petitioner has committed suicide and in respect of the said incident charge sheet is filed and after committal his mother (accused No.2) was attending the court proceedings, at any stretch of imagination, it cannot be accepted that the petitioner was not aware of the said proceedings.
11. In fact the committal court from the date of filing of the charge sheet and till date is issuing process including proclamation against the petitioner to secure his presence. The latest order sheet dated 12.12.2024 also state that NBW is issued against the petitioner. If the petitioner was not evading the process of the court, in all probabilities he would have been arrested by the
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:18572 CRL.P No. 102684 of 2024 concerned police and produced before the court to face the trial. Intentionally, the petitioner has absconded and only after the acquittal of his mother (accused No.2) and when still the trial court is making efforts to secure his presence by reissuing the warrants, the petioiner has approached this court.
12. This is nothing but mockery of the entire legal system. The petitioner cannot be rewarded for his own wrong. Having regard to these aspects, this court is considered opinion that the decisions relied upon by the petitioner are not applicable to the case on hand. In the result, petition fails and accordingly, the following;
ORDER Petition filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is hereby rejected.
Sd/-
(J.M.KHAZI) JUDGE MBS, CT: UMD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8