Dismissed

Veerabhadraiah v. State of Karnataka by

Karnataka HC4 Aug 2021CRL.P/1551/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Karnataka dismissed a Criminal Petition filed by three accused persons seeking quashing of proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The court held that available evidence showed the petitioners abetted the accused No.1 and continued to threaten the victim, making this not a fit case for quashing.

What did the court decide?

Petition for quashing proceedings in C.C.No.8572/2015 dismissed. Proceedings to continue.

Veerabhadraiah Vs State of Karnataka by — Domestic Violence | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 04^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION No.1551/2021

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

VEERABHADRAIAH S/O LATE BHADRAIAH AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS NO.82/C VODDARAPALYA MYLASANDRA DINNE BEGUR, BANGALORE SOUTH – 560 068

¶9

SMT. JAMUNA W/O MAHENDRA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS NO.440, GANDHI CIRCLE NEAR ANJANEYA TEMPLE VARTHUR MAIN ROAD BANGALORE – 560 087

¶10

SMT. KANCHANA W/O PALANETRA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS OPPOSITE TO PASHU HOSPITAL KUDUR 3^RD BLOCK, KUDUR MAGADI TALUK RAMNAGAR DIST – 561 101

¶11

..PETITIONERS (BY SRI B. ANAND, ADVOCATE)

¶12

¶13

AND:

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY MICO LAYOUT POLICE BANGALORE REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE – 560 001

¶15

K. SHALINI PRASAD D/O KC PRASAD AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS LAKSHMI KESHAVA NILAYA 6^TH COSS, SOMESHWARA TEMPLE ROAD BILEKAHALLI, IIM-B (POST) BANGALORE – 560 076 ..RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI B.J. ROHITH, HCGP FOR R-1; KUM. K. SHALINI PRASAD, R-2 -PARTY-IN-PERSON)

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH ALL THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.8572/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE VI A.C.M.M., BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 341, 354D, 109, 506, 504 OF IPC.

¶18

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION , THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused Nos. 2, 4 and 5 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., for quashing the criminal proceedings in C.C.No.8572/2020 pending on the file of the VI A.C.M.M in Crime No.434/2014 registered by Mico Layout Police, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 354(D), 109, 506 and 504 of IPC.

¶22

Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioners, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and respondent No.2-Party-inperson.

¶23

The case of the petitioners are that respondent No.2 herein filed a complaint to the police on 25.06.2014 against these petitioners also accused

¶24

¶25

No.1-Chetan alleging that while she was studying in PUC during the year 2003-2005, accused No.1-Chetan was her classmate and he was fallen in love on her and he was insisting to love him. He used to make frequent phone calls i.e., 400 to 600 calls per day and always blocking her way and snatching her mobile, pulling her hand and trying to touch her body during the year 2004-2012. She has kept quite, for some time and later in the year 2004 and 2010 she made complaint to his sister-Kanchana-petitioner No.3 herein and later also complaint to her second sister-petitioner No.2Jamuna during the year 2006 – 2012. Thereafter, to his father in 2011 the first petitioner, later to mother in 2014 as well as 2011 and 2012 and she explained everything over phone. But, instead of solving the problem, they blamed her, abused her in filthy language and forcing her to accept the marriage

¶26

¶27

proposal with accused No.1. But, she never gave her consent.

¶28

She further alleged that the mother of the accused no.1, who is presently no more, she used to threaten her that if her son committed suicide, she will bring the dead body to the door step of the complainant and threaten that she will be responsible for his death. To accept his marriage proposal, accused No.1 followed so many tactics like consuming mosquito repellent liquid, cut his wrist, stood twice right in front of her house throughout night, burnt his forearm, swallowed sleeping pills etc. and regarding the marriage proposal, the mother of the accused No.1 spoke with her through phone and asked to her father during the year 2011 and 2012. But, she has refused the marriage proposal. Again in December 2012, twice, she along with her mother with maternal uncle went to the house of the relative of accused No.1 and they

¶29

¶30

explained their grievances and they also warned accused No.1 not to trouble her and advised his parents also. Inspite of the same again accused No.1 used to blackmail her and threatening her and she was scared to proceed with marriage with some other person. He also stated that he will kill her would be husband if she try so. Again when he was in the hospital in January 2014, by forcibly injured himself and sent the photos to her and she was very much scared out of the attitude and disturbed so much, lost her peace, lost her concentration on music and studies, she could not complete her studies and her weight also gone down from 47 to 38 kilos. Her mother is heart patient having B.P and unable to face the harassments from accused No.1 and his family members. Even accused No.1 caused the injury to her knee and said if she marries any one else then he will not leave her alive and also he will kill her would be husband. So

¶31

¶32

many years accused No.1 continuous the said attitude by threatening her but she has not lodged any complaint against him. In order to stop the harassment she lodged the complaint. She further contended that accused Nos.2, 4 and 5 instead of advising accused No.1, they advised her to marry and accept the marriage proposal and abating the accused No.1. After registering the case the accused person said to be released on bail. The police after investigation filed the charge sheet against all the accused. The same is challenged before the Court.

¶33

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-Anand has seriously contended that petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are married women and they are not at all residing with their father as they are residing in the maternal house. The accused-Petitioner No.1 is aged person who is 70 years. There are no ingredients to attract any of the offence against them. The entire

¶34

¶35

allegation goes against accused No.1-Chetan and the mother of the accused No.1 who is no more. The proceedings against the petitioner are abuse of process of law and hence prayed for quashing the proceedings against them.

¶36

Per Contra, learned High Court Government Pleader objected the petition and respondent No.2 has personally appeared through video conference and seriously objected the petition and contended that these petitioners also abated accused No.1 in commission of offence, instead of advising accused No.1 they advised her to accept the marriage proposal. They also threatened her by supporting accused No.1. The same was stated in further statement of the victim and even till date accused No.1 continued to harass her and recently she has given one more complaint to the Mico Layout Police on 11.03.2020 for similar offences against these petitioners also. The same was

¶37

¶38

registered in Crime No.78/2020 and the charge sheet also filed pending in C.C.17759/2020 . There is ample evidence against the petitioners for having abated accused No.1 who is none other than the son and brother of these petitioners but, still supporting accused No.1. Therefore, prayed for dismissal.

¶39

Upon hearing the arguments of both the

¶40

counsel and on perusal of the record of course the allegation starts against accused No.1 who is said to be the classmate of respondent No.2 and he was fallen in love on her and insisting her to love and marry him. Continuously, he said to be harassed her for almost more than 11 years and after filing the complaint in 2014 the accused-petitioners said to have not changed accused No.1 and not mend his way. Again he started harassing her and threatening her to marry him otherwise he will commit suicide or else he will kill her would be husband. Respondent No.2 submits that

¶41

¶42

because of his harassment, she was not able to go for marriage proposals with any person with the fear of killing him by this accused No.1. She has already crossed age of 33 years and she is unable to marry anybody and unable to stay at the home because of accused No.1 continuously harassing her. However, the allegation against these petitioners is that the petitioner No.1 is father, petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are sisters, they said to be abating accused No.1. They were forcing her to give her consent for marrying accused No.1. Though she was not consented that the mother of accused No.1 said to have threatened her if accused No.1 commit suicide then she will bring the body, keep in front of the house of respondent No.2 and make for strike/darna.

¶43

Inspite of she has approached these petitioners for solving the problem, these petitioners were not advised accused No.1 properly but they gave

¶44

¶45

threat to the complainant to marry him. The averments made in the charge sheet and further statement of victim-respondent No.2 reveals that these petitioners also abated accused No.1 and they also abused her in filthy language and threatened her. After registering the present case in Crime No.434/2019 in C.C.No.8572/2015 again one more case is registered for the similar offences in Crime No.78/2020, pending on the file of the VI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bengaluru in C.C.No.17759/2020 for the offences under Sections 354(D) as well as 354 of IPC.

¶46

By looking into the entire materials on record, it reveals that there is statement and the material available on record, which show that these petitioners are abated accused No.1, and accused No.1 still harassing the complainant inspite of more than 18 years completed still accused No.1 said to have

¶47

¶48

continued harassing her. Such being the case, in my view it is not a fit case for quashing the proceedings against these petitioners. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶49

ORDER

¶50

The petition filed by accused Nos.2, 4 and 5 for quashing the proceedings in C.C.No.8572/2015 on the file of VI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru is hereby dismissed.

¶51

Sd/JUDGE

¶52

HB/-

Veerabhadraiah v. State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Veerabhadraiah v. State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Narayana Gowda Vs Union of India

N Santhosh Kumar Vs Smt Rajeshwari

C S Sampreet Vs Smt Rajeshwari

Sri. Sagar Vs State of Karnataka

Dr M K Pushpitha Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Narendra L Nayak Vs the State of Karnataka