Full Judgment
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1313 OF 2024 BETWEEN:
1. ANANDAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS S/O LATE RAMAIAH.
2. SUSHEELA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS W/O ANANDAMURTHY.
3. BHUSHAN
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS W/O ANANDAMURTHY. BOTH RESIDING AT NO.35, 3RD CROSS 2ND STAGE, CHANDRA LAYOUT BENGALURU - 560 040. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI TUMBIGI PRABHUGOUDA BASAVANTARAYAGOUDA, ADV.) Digitally signed AND: by B A KRISHNA KUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KARNATAKA BASAVANAGUDI WOMEN POLICE STATION, BENGALURU REP BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT COMPLEX BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. SMT. N. VIDYA AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS W/O ASHWIN KUMAR R/AT NO. 511/3, 7TH MAIN 4TH A CROSS, HAMPINAGAR BENGALURU - 560 104. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI RANGASWAMY, HCGP FOR R-1) -2- THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.26784/2016 REGISTERED BY BASAVANAGUDI WOMEN POLICE STATION, BENGALURU/1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A R/W 34 OF IPC AND SECTION 3 AND 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT, NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF XXXVII ADDL.C.M.M., BENGALURU.I.A.NO.1/2024 FOR STAY.I.A.NO.1/2024 FILED BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO STAY ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.26784/2016 REGISTERED BY BASAVANAGUDI WOMEN POLICE STATION, BENGALURU/1ST RESPONDENT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A R/W 34 OF IPC AND SECTION 3 AND 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT, NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF XXXVII ADDL.C.M.M., BENGALURU. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. Petitioners herein, who are arraigned as accused Nos.2 to 4 in C.C.No.26784/2016 pending before the Court
of XXXVII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.68/2015 registered by Basavanagudi Women Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, are before this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings in the aforesaid case, as against them.
-3-
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned HCGP for the respondent No.1-State.
3. Respondent No.2 herein had filed a complaint before
the Basavanagudi Women Police Station, Bengaluru on 16.10.2015 based on which FIR in Crime No.68/2015 was registered against the petitioners and another. The police after investigation have filed a charge sheet against all the four accused, who are named in the FIR and petitioners herein are arraigned as accused Nos.2 to 4 in the charge sheet. Petitioners are now being tried before the Trial Court for the aforesaid offences in CC No.26784/2016. Challenging the said proceedings, which is pending before the Trial Court in the aforesaid case, petitioners are before this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
there is no material against the petitioners herein which would prima facie attract the alleged offences against them. He submits that petitioners have been falsely -4- implicated for the reason that they are close relatives of accused No.1. According to him, even if the complaint and the charge sheet allegations are presumed to be true, no case can be made out against the petitioners for the alleged offences.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP has opposed the petition.
He submits that the application filed by the petitioners herein under Section 239 of Cr.P.C. seeking discharge has been dismissed by the Trial Court. Revision filed by the petitioners against the said order of the Trial Court dismissing their application seeking discharge is pending before the jurisdictional Sessions Court. The prosecution has examined five charge sheet witnesses as PWs1 to 5. Evidence has commenced in the year 2022 itself. The defence has not cross-examined the aforesaid witnesses and on one pretext or the other, adjournments are being sought. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition.
-5-
6. From the perusal of the allegations made in the
complaint as well as in the charge sheet, it cannot be said that there is no prima facie material to proceed against the petitioners for the alleged offences. Undisputedly, the application filed by petitioners herein before the Trial Court under Section 239 of Cr.P.C. seeking discharge has been dismissed and the revision filed against the said order in the year 2019 is pending before the Court of Sessions Judge. The prosecution has examined five charge sheet witnesses as PWs1 to 5. Though the evidence of the case has commenced in the year 2022 itself, none of the prosecution witnesses have been cross-examined till date and the order sheet maintained by the Trial Court would reflect that at the request of the accused, the matter was adjourned for the purpose of cross-examining the charge sheet witnesses, who are examined as PWs 1 to 5. The power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is required to be exercised sparingly, if only this Court finds that criminal proceedings initiated amounts to abuse of process of law or for the purpose of giving effect to any orders passed by
-6- the Courts under the Criminal Procedure Code or to secure the ends of justice. I am of the view that the case on hand does not come under any of the categories mentioned in Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I do not find any good ground to entertain this petition. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- JUDGE DN