The High Court dismissed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash criminal proceedings involving dowry harassment and assault. The court held that existence of a divorce decree and witness statements did not make the case a fit subject for quashing.
No relief granted; petition dismissed on merits.
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.
NC: 2024:KHC:50697 CRL.P No. 8664 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8664 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC)
/ 528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
SRI SURESHA G R S/O RAMACHANDRAPPA AGED 53 YEARS, MOLAKALMURU TOWN MOLAKALMURU TALUK CHITRADURGA DIST-577 535
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SHANKARAGULLI MAHANTAPPA SANGAPPA., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by VEDAVATHI A K Location: High Court of Karnataka
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.MADHUKARA MADDUR, HCGP FOR R1; R2 SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED)
NC: 2024:KHC:50697 CRL.P No. 8664 of 2024
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.118/2023 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (JR DN) AND JMFC, MOLAKALMURU, CHITRADURGA FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 323, 498A, 504, 506 OF IPC, 1860 AND SECTIONS 3 AND 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT, 1961 BEING ARBITRARY, ERRONEOUS, NOT MAINTAINABLE AND OPPOSED TO LAW EQUITY AND JUSTICE APART FROM BEING ABUSE OF PROCESS OF COURT, IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER HEREIN (ACCUSED NO.3 IN T.C.)
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
ORAL ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused under Section 482 of Cr.P.C for quashing criminal proceedings in C.C.No.118/2023 arising out of Crime No.52/2022 registered by the Molakalmuru Police Station, Chitradurga and charge sheeted for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 498A, 504 and 506 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
NC: 2024:KHC:50697 CRL.P No. 8664 of 2024
prosecution is that on the complaint of respondent-Police, FIR came to be registered in Crime No.52/2022. It is alleged that she was married to the petitioner and having two female children aged about 21 years and 17 years respectively. They are studying in the college. At the time of marriage, Rs.50,000/- cash, Motor Cycle, two thola Gold chain, clothes and household articles were given to the petitioner and has spent the entire marriage expenses.
NC: 2024:KHC:50697 CRL.P No. 8664 of 2024
FIR. The FIR was withdrawn as not pressed and on filing of charge sheet, the petitioner is before this Court.
contended that as per allegation, the accused is said to be harassing for last five years but no such complaint is filed against him. Alleged incident took place on 04.04.2022 but no complaint is registered on that day. There was four days delay in lodging the complaint. Complaint is lodged on 08.02.2022. That apart, it is contended that the allegations are omnibus allegations which are not sustainable. Petitioner has also filed divorce and obtained decree of divorce. Such being the case, continuation of proceedings will be an abuse of process of law. Hence, he prays to allow the petition.
daughters have given evidence against the petitioner for having harassing the complainant. There are specific allegation against the petitioner and therefore, sought for dismissal of the petition.
NC: 2024:KHC:50697 CRL.P No. 8664 of 2024
for the appellant and perused the material on record, relationship between the petitioner and respondent No.2 are not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that petitioner and respondent No.2 are having two female daughters aged about 22 years and 17 years respectively, who are going to college. The allegation against the petitioner is that five years from the date of filing the complaint, the petitioner is said to be having illicit relationship with some other lady and when the same was questioned, he used to abuse and assault the complainant physically. It is also contended by respondent No.2 that the petitioner is not looking after the family, not maintaining the family and not spending any amount for education expenses of the children and when the same was questioned, the petitioner asked respondent No.2 to get 10 lakhs from the parental house.
NC: 2024:KHC:50697 CRL.P No. 8664 of 2024
to kill her. Thereby, respondent No.2 along with her children went back to the parents house and lodged the complaint. It is the contention of the petitioner’s counsel that since five years harassment is going on. The offence under Section 498A of IPC is harassment on the woman by the husband or the relative of the husband, is a continuing offence. That apart on 04.04.2022, the petitioner has abused and assaulted respondent No.2 and threatened to kill her. Thereafter, respondent No.2 went to her parents house and admittedly, lodged complaint on 08.04.2022.
Of course, there is four days delay in lodging the complaint. Background of this petitioner was that he was a practicing Advocate in Molakalmuru Taluk and respondent No.2 is wife. Even if she go to the Police Station, the Police may not entertain the complaint and register FIR immediately.
NC: 2024:KHC:50697 CRL.P No. 8664 of 2024
decree of divorce has been granted, which shows that respondent No.2 is not able to contest the matter because she is already abandoned by the petitioner and not maintained by the petitioner. On perusal of the statement of the K.S.Ananda, brother of the complainant, statements of Meghana G.S. and Mahima G.S., who are the daughters of petitioner and respondent No.2, it is observed that they have also given statement against the petitioner for having harassing respondent No.2, demanding dowry and assault made by the petitioner. Apart from that, parents of respondent No.2 have also given statement against the petitioner.
NC: 2024:KHC:50697 CRL.P No. 8664 of 2024
be influenced by the trial Court.
Sd/(K.NATARAJAN) JUDGE
MDS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 5
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings instituted under Sections 498A IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act should be quashed given the post-divorce decree and delay in FIR.
Whether the allegations constitute an abuse of process of court warranting the quashing of criminal proceedings.
4 provisions across 4 enactments
SRI SURESHA G R
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
SMT G S SUMANA
K. NATARAJAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
