Sri.Saurav Gupta Vs State of Karnataka

SRI.SAURAV GUPTA, S/O. SHAMBHU DAYAL GUPTA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, PRESENTLY R/AT: B406, DSR SUNSHINE APARTMENT, 1^ST MAIN, 2^ND CROSS, T. KRISHNA REDDY LAYOUT, BANASWADI, BENGALURU - 560 043.

¶10

SRI. SHAMBHU DAYAL GUPTA, S/O. SHIWNARAYAN GUPTA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,

¶11

Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

SMT. PARABATI GUPTA, W/O. SHAMBHU DAYAL GUPTA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,

¶13

PETITIONER NOS. 2 AND 3 ARE RESIDING AT NO. 139, RBC ROAD, NALIHATI (M), NORTH 24 PARGANAS, WEST BENGAL.

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SRI. HONNAPPA S., ADVOCATE)

¶16

2 -

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:30614 CRL.P No. 9447 of 2024

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

AND:

¶20

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY NORTH EAST WOMEN P S, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 037

¶21

MRS. ALKA GUPTHA, D/O. KRISHNA KUMAR GUPTHA, W/O. SANDIP GUPTA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.1705, NIKO HOMES 1, BHARTIYA CITY, HEGDENAGAR MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE CITY - 560 064

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADDL. SPP FOR R1; SRI. VIVEK S., ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶24

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. (FILED U/S.528

¶25

BNNS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 0033/2024 REGISTERED BY NORTH EAST WOMEN POLICE STATION NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF 41ST ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE CITY FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENSE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 506, 498A, 504, 323 R/W 34 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860.

¶26

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶27

3 -

¶28

NC: 2025:KHC:30614 CRL.P No. 9447 of 2024

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶31

ORAL ORDER

¶32

This captioned petition is filed by the in-laws of respondent No.2/complainant seeking quashment of the proceedings pending in FIR in Crime No.0033/2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 506, 498A, 504 and 323 read with Section 34 of the IPC.

¶33

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, learned Addl.SPP for respondent No.1 and learned counsel for respondent No.2. Perused the records.

¶34

Respondent No.2 lodged a complaint on 27.06.2024 alleging that her husband/accused No.1 and her in-laws subjected her to cruelty, ill-treatment, and threats to her life. She further alleged that petitioner No.1, her brother-in-law, threatened to murder her. It is stated that on 27.06.2024, at around 11:00 a.m., while she and accused No.1 were discussing certain household matters, accused No.1 abused her in filthy language and physically assaulted her for nearly

¶35

4 -

¶36

NC: 2025:KHC:30614 CRL.P No. 9447 of 2024

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

ten minutes. Following the incident, she contacted the emergency helpline and lodged a complaint, which resulted in the registration of the present crime.

¶39

Learned counsel for the petitioners, reiterating the grounds urged in the petition, would submit that petitioner No.1, being the brother-in-law of respondent No.2, and petitioner Nos.2 and 3, being her in-laws, have no nexus whatsoever with the alleged incident. It is contended that they have been falsely implicated only with an intent to harass, and hence, the present petition is filed seeking quashing of the proceedings against them.

¶40

Per contra , learned counsel for respondent No.2, placing reliance on the statement of objections, would point out that call detail records have been produced, which prima facie indicate that petitioner No.1/accused No.2 was also intimidating and threatening respondent No.2.

¶41

5 -

¶42

NC: 2025:KHC:30614 CRL.P No. 9447 of 2024

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on careful consideration of the material placed on record, this Court has meticulously examined the complaint lodged by respondent No.2/complainant. The records disclose that petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are the in-laws of respondent No.2 and are permanently residing at Kolkata, whereas accused No.1, who is the husband of respondent No.2, and respondent No.2 herself, are residing in Bengaluru. Petitioner No.1, who is the brother-in-law of respondent No.2, is also residing in Bengaluru, but at a different address from that of accused No.1 and respondent No.2.

¶45

A plain reading of the complaint makes it evident that there are no specific or serious allegations against petitioner Nos.2 and 3 (arrayed as accused Nos.3 and 4), except for a vague reference that they allegedly supported accused No.1 by calling him over the phone. Such a bald and omnibus allegation, in the absence of any concrete particulars, does not prima facie satisfy the ingredients of the offence under Section 498A of the IPC. It is an admitted position that petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are residing in Kolkata and were not

¶46

6 -

¶47

NC: 2025:KHC:30614 CRL.P No. 9447 of 2024

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

present at the scene when the alleged incident took place in Bengaluru. The assertion that the complainant was subjected to cruelty at the hands of petitioner Nos.2 and 3 is therefore not substantiated by any prima facie credible material. In the considered opinion of this Court, the allegations against petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are insufficient to even prima facie warrant a criminal trial.

¶50

In contrast, the complaint contains specific

¶51

averments and material against petitioner No.1, attributing to him direct acts of intimidation and threats towards respondent No.2. The nature of these allegations, if taken at face value, disclose the commission of cognizable offences and, therefore, the case against petitioner No.1 cannot be quashed at this stage. Consequently, no indulgence can be shown in his favour.

¶52

Even if the entire complaint and accompanying statements are accepted in their entirety and without demur, no offence is made out against petitioner Nos.2 and 3, who are aged about 61 and 57 years respectively, and whose residence is at Kolkata, far from the place of occurrence in Bengaluru.

¶53

7 -

¶54

NC: 2025:KHC:30614 CRL.P No. 9447 of 2024

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

The record does not reveal their physical presence or active participation in the alleged incident. In these circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that continuation of the proceedings against petitioner Nos.2 and 3 would amount to an abuse of the process of law. Accordingly, this is a fit case for exercising the inherent jurisdiction of this Court to quash the proceedings insofar as petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are concerned, while permitting the prosecution to proceed against petitioner No.1.

¶57

Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

¶58

ORDER

¶59

(i) The petition is allowed-in-part .

¶60

(ii) The proceedings in Crime No.0033/2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 506, 498A, 504 and 323 read with Section 34 of the IPC, by the North East Women Police Station, Sampigehalli Sub-Division, Bengaluru City, and now pending on the file of the 41st Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nrupathunga Road,

¶61