Karnataka High Court
Ameet And Ors vs The State Of Karnataka And Anr on 1 February, 2025
Author: S.Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:729
CRL.P No. 201100 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 201100 OF 2023
(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
1. AMEET S/O BHIMAPPA BELLUBBI,
AGE: 37 YEARS,
OCC: EXCISE INSPECTOR, KALAGHATGI PS.,
R/O. HUBLI ROAD, KALAGHATGI,
TQ. KALAGHATGI, DIST. DHARWAD-581204.
2. BHIMAPPA S/O YAMANAPPA BELLUBBI,
AGE: 68 YEARS, OCC: PENSIONER.
3. SMT. SHAILA W/O BHIMAPPA BELLUBBI,
AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK
Digitally signed by 4. AJIT S/O BHIMAPPA BELLUBBI,
SHIVAKUMAR
HIREMATH AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: GOVERNMENT SERVANT,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA PETITIONERS NO 2 TO 4 ARE
R/O H. NO. 56 NAVRASPUR COLONY,
OPPOSITE DISTRICT COURT COMPLEX,
BAGALKOT ROAD, VIJAYAPURA-586109.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI R. S. LAGALI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH THE SHO., VIJAYAPURA WOMEN P S.,
REP. BY THE ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:729
CRL.P No. 201100 of 2023
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI-585102.
2. SMT. PRIYANKA W/O AMEET BELLUBBI,
AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. TORAVI VILLAGE, TQ. TIKOTA,
DIST. VIJAYAPURA,
PRESENTLY R/O. GHEWARCHAND COLONY,
ATHANI ROAD,
VIJAYAPURA-586102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. MAYA T.R., HCGP FOR R1
SRI AVINASH A. UPLAONKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO
ALLOW THIS CRIMINAL PETITION AND THEREBY THE ORDER
OF TAKING COGNIZANCE AND ISSUE OF PROCESS DATED
03.07.2023 PASSED IN CRIMINAL CASE NO.1636/2023
(ARISING OUT OF VIJAYAPURA WOMEN PS. CRIME
NO.189/2022) BY THE IV ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC-III,
COURT, VIJAYAPURA TO FACE TRIAL FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 498A, 109, 323, 504, 506 R/W.
SECTION 34 OF IPC ALONG WITH SECTION 4 OF DOWRY
PROHIBITION ACT AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS
PURSUANT TO THE FILING OF THE CHARGESHEET AGAINST
THE PETITIONER PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A.
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:729
CRL.P No. 201100 of 2023
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
1. The accused Nos.1 to 4 are before this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.1636/2023 pending before the IV Additional Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Vijayapur, arising out of Crime No.189/2022 registered by the Vijayapur Women Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 109, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, the accused No.1 is the husband and accused Nos.2 to 4 are the parents and younger brother of accused No.1. The accused No.1 is a Government servant serving at Dharwad district and accused No.4 is also a Government servant serving at Vijayapura. After the marriage, accused No.1 and respondent No.2 were residing at Dharwad. Accused Nos.2 to 4 are all residents of Vijayapura. By making false and baseless -4- NC: 2025:KHC-K:729 CRL.P No. 201100 of 2023 allegations, only for the reason that they are the close relatives of the accused No.1, they have been falsely implicated in the present case.
4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader and learned counsel for the respondent No.2 have opposed the petition. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 submits that, there are allegations even as against accused Nos.2 to 4 which would attract the charge-sheeted offences. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition.
5. A perusal of the material on record would go to show that, the marriage of accused No.1/petitioner No.1 with respondent No.2 was performed on 07.05.2017. The accused No.1 is said to be a Government servant working at Dharwad as an Excise Inspector. The accused Nos.2 and 3 are the parents of accused No.1 and accused No.4. Accused No.4 who is the younger brother of the accused No.1, is also said to be a Government servant working as Police Sub-Inspector in Vijayapur district. The material on record would go to show that, accused No.1 and his wife i.e. respondent No.2 herein were residing in Dharwad after marriage, whereas, the accused -5- NC: 2025:KHC-K:729 CRL.P No. 201100 of 2023 Nos.2 to 4 are all residing in Vijayapura. A perusal of the allegations made in the first information and also in the charge- sheet would go to show that, general and omnibus allegations are made against accused Nos.2 to 4. There are no specific allegations against the said accused, which would attract the charge-sheeted offence as against them.
6. 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 1 (2019)4 SCC 615 -6- NC: 2025:KHC-K:729 CRL.P No. 201100 of 2023 complaint under section 498-A as a basic human 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 -7- NC: 2025:KHC-K:729 CRL.P No. 201100 of 2023 allegations of the complainant are required to be scrutinized with great care and circumspection.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. In the background of the aforesaid Judgments, if the material on record is scrutinized, I am of the opinion that, 2 (2019)4 SCC 615 3 (2019)8 SCC 642 4 2020(6) KAR.L.J.90 -8- NC: 2025:KHC-K:729 CRL.P No. 201100 of 2023 the prayer made by the accused Nos.2 to 4 in this petition needs to be granted and the petition is liable to be rejected, insofar as it relates to accused No.1, who is the husband of respondent No.2. Accordingly, the following order:
ORDER
(i) The Criminal petition is partly allowed;
(ii) This criminal petition is dismissed as against accused No.1 and is allowed insofar as accused Nos.2, 3 and 4, who are the relatives of the accused No.1;
(iii) The criminal proceedings as against accused Nos.2 to 4 is quashed and the trial Court shall proceed further, as against accused No.1, in accordance with law.
Sd/-
(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE SVH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26 CT:PK