High Court of Karnataka examined a petition under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of proceedings for dowry harassment. Despite allegations of conflicting versions, the court found serious disputes requiring trial and dismissed the petition.
Petition for quashing of criminal proceedings in C.C. No.30/2023 was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2156 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
S/O LATE KHADAR MOHAMMEDEEN, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT NO.2902, OPP KAIF MASJID, RAJEEV NAGAR, MYSORE - 570 007.
W/O GHOUSE MOHAMMEDEEN, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT NO.2902, OPP KAIF MASJID, RAJEEV NAGAR, MYSORE - 570 007.
Digitally signed by VEDAVATHI A K Location: High Court of Karnataka
S/O GHOUSE MOHAMMEDEEN, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/AT NO.2902, OPP KAIF MASJID, RAJEEV NAGAR, MYSORE - 570 007.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. ZAMEER PASHA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
NC: 2024:KHC:2729 CRL.P No. 2156 of 2023
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. VINAY MAHADEVAIAH, HCGP FOR R1D)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE CASE IN C.C.NO.30/2023 IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER ARE CONCERNED FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S.498-A R/W SEC.34 OF IPC AND SEC.3 AND 4 OF DP ACT PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED 7th ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (Sr.Dn.) AND CJM, MYSURU VIDE ANNEXURE C.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition filed by the petitioner/accused Nos.2 to 4 under section 482 of Cr.P.C., for quashing the criminal proceedings in C.C No.30/2023 arising out of Crime No.123/2022 registered by Mysore City Police for the offences punishable under sections 498 (A) read with 34 of IPC and sections 3, 4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act (herein after referred as 'DP Act'), pending on the file of VII Addl. Sr. Civil Judge and CJM, Mysore.
NC: 2024:KHC:2729 CRL.P No. 2156 of 2023
harassing her physically and mentally. Therefore, complaint came to be filed and the charge sheet was filed.
NC: 2024:KHC:2729 CRL.P No. 2156 of 2023
allegation is against accused No.1, not against petitioners. Both petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are in laws and the petitioner No.3 is the brother-in-law, they are all residing separately. The respondent No.2, was having illicit intimacy with some person and it was witnessed by the accused No.1. Thereafter, he has filed case for divorce. After receiving the divorce notice, this complaint came to be filed. Even earlier she has filed the complaint, there was no much allegation and thereafter she has improved her version. Hence, prayed for allowing the petition.
person who has spent the amount towards the dowry and said to have purchased furniture and other gadgets as per the demand made by the accused persons. Though the learned counsel for the petitioners submits the car was purchased by the accused No.1, but the amount was paid by the respondent No.2. But the respondent No.2 has stated the petitioners have obtained Rs.15 lakhs for the purpose of buying the car and these are all disputed facts. Whether they had paid Rs.15 lakhs for the purpose of buying the car and the petitioner himself was having source of income for buying the car are all matter of trial. At this stage, the court cannot appreciate the evidence as statements. Such being the case, there is no omnibus statement made by any of the witnesses, there is serious allegation against the petitioners, apart from the accused No.1. Such being the case, it is not a fit case for quashing the petition. Hence, the petition deserves to be dismissed.
Accordingly, this petition is hereby dismissed .
Sd/JUDGE
AKV
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 50_CT:SK
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings under Sec. 498-A IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act should be quashed as they are based on omnibus allegations.
Whether disputed facts regarding dowry demands and harassment make the case unfit for summary disposal.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Ghouse Mohammedeen
Firdous Khanam
Hyder
State
Bi Bi Ayesha
K. Natarajan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
