Karnataka High Court
Pranesh And Ors vs The State Of Karnataka And Anr on 10 February, 2025
Author: S.Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:927
CRL.P No. 200980 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200980 OF 2024
(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
1. DELETED VIDE COURT ORDER
DATED 22.08.2024
2. HOBASINGH S/O MOTIRAM CHOWHAN,
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS,
OCC: RETIRED PERSON,
R/O. MAHAVIR NAGAR,
NEAR JEWARGI ROAD,
RAILWAY OVER BRIDGE,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585102.
3. SHOBHADEVI W/O HOBASINGH CHOWHAN,
Digitally signed by AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
SHIVAKUMAR OCC: HOUSEWIFE,
HIREMATH
R/O. MAHAVIR NAGAR,
Location: HIGH NEAR JEWARGI ROAD,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA RAILWAY OVER BRIDGE,
KALABURAGI-585102.
4. GIRISH S/O HOBASINGH CHOWHAN,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
OCC: DRIVER,
R/O. MAHAVIR NAGAR,
NEAR JEWARGI ROAD,
RAILWAY OVER BRIDGE,
KALABURAGI-585102..
5. SHAILA W/O GIRISH CHOWHAN,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:927
CRL.P No. 200980 of 2024
OCC: HOUSEWIFE,
R/O. MAHAVIR NAGAR,
NEAR JEWARGI ROAD,
RAILWAY OVER BRIDGE,
KALABURAGI-585102.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI RAVI B. CHAWAN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH BHALKI TOWN POLICE STATION,
REP. BY ADDL. SPP,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI-585103.
2. SMT. VIDYAVATI
W/O PRANESH CHOWHAN,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSE HOLD,
R/O. MAHAVIR NAGAR,
NEAR JEWARGI ROAD,
RAILWAY OVER BRIDGE,
KALABURAGI,
NOW AT KUDTE GALLI, BHALKI,
DIST. BIDAR-585401.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI VEERANAGOUDA MALIPATIL, HCGP FOR R1
SRI DEEPAK V. BARAD, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ALLOW
THIS PETITION OF THE PETITIONER NO.1 TO 5/ ACCUSED NO.1 TO 5
AND QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS OF CC NO. 2048 OF 2024 IN
FIR NO. 17 OF 2024 VIDE CRIME NO. 2048 OF 2024 OF BHALKI
TOWN PS FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 506, 498(A), 323,
504 R/W 149 OF IPC AND SECTION 3, 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION
ACT AGAINST THE PETITIONERS, WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE
OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT BHALKI BIDAR DISTRICT.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:927
CRL.P No. 200980 of 2024
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
1. Accused nos.2 to 5 are before this Court under Section 482 Cr.PC with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.2044/2024 pending before the Court of Civil Judge & JMFC, Bhalki, arising out of Crime No.17/2024 registered by Bhalki Town Police Station, Bidar District, for the offences punishable under Sections 506, 498A, 323, 504 read with 149 IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners herein are the parents, sister and brother of accused no.1. By making false and omnibus allegations against them, they have been implicated in the impugned criminal proceedings. The allegation of abusing and assaulting the first informant on 31.12.2023 is only as against accused no.1. Petition as against accused no.1 has been already dismissed as withdrawn. Accused nos.2 to 5 have been implicated in the impugned criminal proceedings only for the reason that accused no.2 had approached the police and made a complaint against -4- NC: 2025:KHC-K:927 CRL.P No. 200980 of 2024 the relatives of the first informant on 13.12.2023. There are no specific allegations against accused nos.2 to 5 in the first information submitted by respondent no.2. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.
4. Per contra, learned HCGP and the learned Counsel for respondent no.2 have opposed the prayer made in the petition. They submit that investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed, and the material on record would go to show that sufficient material is available against accused nos.2 to 5 to prosecute them for the charge sheeted offences. Accordingly, they pray to dismiss the petition.
5. Accused no.1 is the husband of respondent no.2 and their marriage was solemnized on 23.12.2020. In the first information, it is alleged that at the time of marriage itself, there was demand for payment of dowry and the family members of the first informant had paid dowry to the accused persons as per their demand. In the first information, it is alleged that in the matrimonial home, the accused persons were torturing and ill-treating the first informant in furtherance of their demand for payment of additional dowry, and on -5- NC: 2025:KHC-K:927 CRL.P No. 200980 of 2024 20.04.2023 she was sent back to her parents house by the accused persons. Thereafter, her parents had dropped her to her matrimonial home and had paid certain additional dowry to the accused persons. Inspite of the same, once again on 07.08.2023, the accused persons ousted the first informant from the matrimonial home demanding additional dowry, and therefore, she had taken shelter in her parents house thereafter. On 31.12.2023, accused no.1 came to her parents house and allegedly made a demand for bringing additional dowry and he also abused and assaulted the first informant and when her relatives tried to interfere, he also allegedly threatened them with dire consequences, and thereafter, left the house.
6. Material made available to this Court by the learned Counsel for the petitioners would go to show that on 13.12.2023 accused no.2 had approached the police and filed the complaint to take action against the parents and relatives of the first informant herein for the reason that they were threatening him. Based on the said complaint, it appears that subsequently FIR has been registered in Crime No.11/2024 against the parents and relatives of the first informant herein -6- NC: 2025:KHC-K:927 CRL.P No. 200980 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 506 read with 34 IPC. Even otherwise, the material on record would go to show that as against accused nos.2 to 5 the allegations found in the first information are general and omnibus in nature and no specific allegations are found against them.
7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PREETI GUPTA AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANOTHER1 has held as follows:
"32. It is matter of common knowledge that unfortunately matrimonial litigation is rapidly increasing in our country. All the courts of our country including this Court are flooded with matrimonial cases. This clearly demonstrates discontent and unrest in the family life of a large number of people of the society.
33. The learned members of the Bar have enormous social responsibility and obligation to ensure that the social fiber of family life is not ruined or demolished. They must ensure that exaggerated versions of small incidents should not be reflected in the criminal complaints. Majority of the complaints are filed either on their advice or with their concurrence. The learned members of the Bar who belong to a noble profession must maintain its noble traditions and should treat every complaint under section 498-A as a basic human 1 (2010) 7 SCC 667 -7- NC: 2025:KHC-K:927 CRL.P No. 200980 of 2024 problem and must make serious endeavour to help the parties in arriving at an amicable resolution of that human problem. They must discharge their duties to the best of their abilities to ensure that social fiber, peace and tranquility of the society remains intact. The members of the Bar should also ensure that one complaint should not lead to multiple cases.
34. Unfortunately, at the time of filing of the complaint the implications and consequences are not properly visualized by the complainant that such complaint can lead to insurmountable harassment, agony and pain to the complainant, accused and his close relations.
35. The ultimate object of justice is to find out the truth and punish the guilty and protect the innocent. To find out the truth is a Herculean task in majority of these complaints. The tendency of implicating the husband and all his immediate relations is also not uncommon. At times, even after the conclusion of the criminal trial, it is difficult to ascertain the real truth. The courts have to be extremely careful and cautious in dealing with these complaints and must take pragmatic realities into consideration while dealing with matrimonial cases. The allegations of harassment of husband's close relations who had been living in different cities and never visited or rarely visited the place where the complainant resided would have an entirely different complexion. The allegations of the complainant are required to be scrutinized with great care and circumspection.-8-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:927 CRL.P No. 200980 of 2024
8. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Case of TARBEZ KHAN ALIAS GUDDU & OTHERS VS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANOTHER2 and in the case of SEENIVASAN VS THE STATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE3, has observed that in the absence of specific allegations, which would attract the offences, an attempt to implicate the near relatives of the husband cannot be permitted.
9. This Court in the case of ASMA KHANUM @ NOOR ASMA & OTHERS VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANOTHER4 has held that when the material on record would go to show that the petitioners, who are close relatives of husband, are married and residing separately and when the complaint lacks specific allegations so as to implicate the petitioners for the offences alleged against them, such criminal prosecution shall not be allowed to continue.
10. In the background of the judgments referred to supra, if the allegations found against the petitioners herein who are arrayed accused nos.2 to 5 in the impugned criminal 2 (2019)4 SCC 615 3 (2 019)8 SCC 642 4 2020(6) KAR.L.J.90 -9- NC: 2025:KHC-K:927 CRL.P No. 200980 of 2024 proceedings is sanctioned, it is apparent that since the allegations as against the petitioners are general and omnibus in nature, continuation of the impugned criminal proceedings as against them would amount to abuse of process of law, and therefore, the same is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the following order:
11. Petition is allowed. The entire proceedings in C.C.No.2044/2024 pending before the Court of Civil Judge & JMFC, Bhalki, arising out of Crime No.17/2024 registered by Bhalki Town Police Station, Bidar District, for the offences punishable under Sections 506, 498A, 323, 504 read with 149 IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, as against the petitioners/accused nos.2 to 5 is hereby quashed. It is made clear that proceedings as against accused no.1 shall be continued in accordance with law.
Sd-
(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE KK