Smt Sumithra Vs State of Karnataka

SRI. SAMPATH RAM S/O M. RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS. BOTH ARE RESIDING AT: NEAR GOWRI SCHOOL, V.V. PURAM, GOWRIBIDANURU TOWN, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT - 561 208.

¶10

…PETITIONERS

¶11

(BY SRI. ANIL R., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by ARUNKUMAR M S 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA Location: High Court of Karnataka BY DODDABALLAPURA WOMEN POLICE STATION, DODDABALLAPURA, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶14

SMT. CHITRA R. W/O S. DARSHAN RAM AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/AT SOMASHETTIHALLI VILLAGE, TUBUGERE HOBLI,

¶15

2 -

¶16

NC: 2025:KHC:2377 CRL.P NO.13697 OF 2023

¶17

DODDABALLAPUR TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 561 203.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SMT. M.M. WAHEEDA, HCGP FOR R1; RESPONDENT NO.2 - SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED)

¶20

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO QUASH THE F.I.R IN CRIME NO.98/2023 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1-DODDABALLAPURA WOMEN POLICE STATION AGAINST THE PETITIONERS FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 498A, 323, 504, 506 READ WITH SECTION 34 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE AND SECTIONS 3 AND 4 OF THE DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC.,DODDABALLAPURA VIDE ANNEXURE-A.

¶21

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

In this petition, petitioner-accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crime No.98/2023 registered by the Doddaballapura Women Police Station seeks the following relief:

¶24

"To quash F.I.R. in Crime No.98/2023 registered by the Doddaballapura Women Police Station-respondent No.1 for the offences punishable under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, pending on the file of the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC., at Doddaballapura vide Annexure-A, as against the petitioners."

¶25

3 -

¶26

NC: 2025:KHC:2377 CRL.P NO.13697 OF 2023

¶27

Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and perused the material on record.

¶28

Respondent No.2-complainant having been served with notice of the petition, has chosen to remain unrepresented and has not contested the petition.

¶29

A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the respondent No.2-complainant is the wife of one S. Darshan Ram and petitioners are the parents of the said S. Darshan Ram. In the first instance, the respondent No.2-complainant lodged a complaint dated 06^th September, 2022 against her husband Darshan Ram for various offences including offences under Sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The said complaint culminated in an endorsement given by the Police Authorities to the respondent No.2-complainant, directing her to approach the Civil Court. It is the grievance of the petitioners that, having failed to pursue her false and frivolous complaint as against their son, the respondent No.2 with a malafide intentions and ulterior motives had filed the instant complaint dated 08^th October, 2023 putting forth

¶30

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2377 CRL.P NO.13697 OF 2023

¶31

false and frivolous allegations against the petitioners for the aforesaid offences and continuation of the same qua the petitioneraccused Nos.2 and 3 who are not residing with the respondent No.2-complainant at any point of time would amount to abuse of process of law and such, the petitioners are before this Court by way of present petition.

¶32

A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the respondent No.2-complainant got married to one S. Darshan Ram, who is the son of petitioners herein and the said S. Darshan Ram had been arraigned as accused No.1 in the impugned F.I.R. in Crime No.98/2023 dated 08^th October, 2023 registered by the Doddaballapura Women Police Station. It is also not in dispute that, prior to the aforesaid F.I.R. registered against the petitioneraccused Nos.2 and 3 as well as their son S. Darshan Ram (accused No.1), the respondent No.2-complainant had earlier filed a complaint only against her husband accused No.1 and since, the same ended culminated in an endorsement issued by the respondent-Police Authorities that she had to approach the Civil Court, the respondent No.2-complainant appears to have filed the present complaint with a malafide intentions and ulterior motives in

¶33

5 -

¶34

NC: 2025:KHC:2377 CRL.P NO.13697 OF 2023

¶35

order to wreak vengeance against the petitioners and as such, the continuation of the present proceedings against the petitioneraccused Nos.2 and 3 would amount to abuse of process of law warranting interference by this Court in the present petition.

¶36

In the result, I pass the following:

¶37

O R D E R

¶38

1. The Criminal Petition is allowed ; and

¶39

1. The impugned F.I.R. in Crime No.98/2023 registered by Doddaballapura Women Police Station, Doddaballapura for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act is hereby quashed qua the petitioner-accused Nos.2 and 3.

¶40

SD/(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

¶41

ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8

Smt Sumithra v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Sumithra v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Babu @ Bommanahalli Babu @ Ayub Khan Vs State by Kengeri P S

Ms Subhra Porwal Vs State of Karnataka

Jayakumar Raju (in Fir) Vs the State of Karnataka by

Smt Mamatha S Vs State of Karnataka

B K Manju Vs Stae by Bagalur Police Station

M Uday Kumar Vs Master C U Yadunandan