Smt Raghavi Vs the State of Karnataka

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS REGISTERED BY THE CHIKKAMAGALURU WOMEN POLICE IN CR.NO.56/2022 AGAINST THE PETITIONER ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHIKKAMAGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER Section 354D, 504, 34 OF IPC, ETC.

¶29

IN CRL.P NO. 11548/2022:

¶30

BETWEEN:

¶31

MISS SUDHA P D/O PALANISWAMY AGED 35 YEARS R/A FLORIYA LAYOUT SAGUNIPURA ROAD CHIKKAMAGALURU TOWN 577201

¶32

...PETITIONER

¶33

(BY SRI. AKSHAY KUMAR JAIN., ADVOCATE)

¶34

AND:

¶35

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SRINGERI PS REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALORE 560001

¶36

SMT RAGHAVI AGED 29 YEARS W/O RAJENDRA R/AT SHARADANAGAR SRINGERI TOWN CHIKKAMAGALURU 577201

¶37

...RESPONDENTS

¶38

(BY SRI. VINAY MAHADEVAIAH., ADVOCATE FOR R-1; SRI. DHANANJAY KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

¶39

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER Section 482

¶40

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:24610 CRL.P No. 9586 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 11548 of 2022

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.302/2022 ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., SRINGERI, CHIKKAMAGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 498A, 506 READ WITH 34 OF IPC (ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.10/2022 OF SERINGERI POLICE STATION) IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED, ETC.

¶43

THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶44

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI

¶45

ORAL ORDER

¶46

These petitions are filed under Section 482 of Code

¶47

of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioners.

¶48

In Crl.P.No.9586/2022, accused No.1 Smt.

¶49

Raghavi is seeking quashing the criminal proceeding initiated against her in Cr.No.56/2022 of Chikkamagaluru Women PS for the offences punishable under Sections 354D & 504 r/w Section 34 of IPC.

¶50

In Crl.P.No.11548/2022, accused No.2 Ms Sudha P is seeking quashing of criminal proceeding initiated against her in C.C.No.302/2022 on the file of Civil

¶51

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:24610 CRL.P No. 9586 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 11548 of 2022

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

Judge and JMFC, Sringeri, Chikkamagaluru, arising out of Cr.No.10/2022 of Sringeri PS for the offences punishable under Section 498-A, 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC.

¶54

It is pertinent to note that the petitioner of one case is complainant in the other case.

¶55

Though these petitions are arising out of different crime numbers, having regard to the fact that the petitioner in one case is the complainant in other and the basic facts are common, these two petitions are clubbed together and disposed of by a common order.

¶56

Since Crl.P.No.11548/2022 is arising out of a

¶57

crime registered at earlier point of time, it is taken for discussion first.

¶58

Complaint averments reveal that accused No.1

¶59

Rajendra is the husband of complainant. Accused No.3 Raghavendra is the brother of accused No.1. The marriage

¶60

of complainant Raghavi and accused No.1 took place about nine years back and they are having a daughter aged 8

¶61

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:24610 CRL.P No. 9586 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 11548 of 2022

¶62

HC-KAR

¶63

years. Though it was a love marriage, after the birth of their daughter, accused No.1 started physical and mental harassment to her. When she tried to find out reason, she realised that accused No.1 is having illicit relationship with accused No.2 Sudha. On 05.03.2018, complainant saw her husband i.e, accused No.1 and accused No.2 Sudha together at Belur. They used to give life threat to the complainant.

¶64

In this regard on 06.03.2018, she lodged complaint with Sringeri police. They summoned accused No.1 and advised him. After this, accused No.1 has thrown

¶65

out the complainant and their daughter from the matrimonial home and since then she is residing in a rented house along with her daughter. Accused No.1 is staying with accused No.2 Sudha in Chikkamagaluru. He used to visit the complainant and cause mental and physical harassment to her. In this regard, accused No.3 Raghavendra called and gave threat of eliminating the complainant and her parents, if she disturb his brother

¶66

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:24610 CRL.P No. 9586 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 11548 of 2022

¶67

HC-KAR

¶68

i.e., accused No.1 and accused No.2 and hence the

¶69

complaint.

¶70

In support of her petition, accused No.2 Sudha has contended that the proceedings against her is illegal and perverse. She is innocent of the offences alleged and has been falsely implicated on account of vengeance and also as counterblast to the proceedings initiated against the complainant. Even where the entire allegations in the complaint are taken to be true on its face value, they would not make out any offence. No overt acts are attributed to accused No.2. She would not come under the preview of Section 498-A as she is not related to accused No.1. Continuation of the proceedings against accused No.2 amount to abuse of the process of the Court and hence the petition.

¶71

So far as the complaint averments in Crl.P.No.9586/2022 are concerned, it is alleged that while complainant Sudha was studying law, accused No.1

¶72

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:24610 CRL.P No. 9586 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 11548 of 2022

¶73

HC-KAR

¶74

Raghavi used to trouble her and gave threat. She is also causing trouble to her relatives and friends and making them go away from her. She constantly called the complainant day in and day out and give threat. She used to call her during the night and gave threat. Even if her number is blocked, she used to call from different numbers and say that either she should commit suicide or she is going to kill her. She was also saying that she has left some people after her and would be killed when alone. The supporters of accused No.1 Raghavi, viz., Sudhir Kotyan and Deepak, also used to make telephonic calls and trouble her. On 09.05.2022, she gave a complaint with Chikkamagaluru Women PS. All these days she desisted from giving complaint as it may affect her studies. She has also given phone numbers through which the accused persons have made calls and gave threat.

¶75

Accused No.1 Raghavi has sought quashing of criminal proceedings against her contending that there is inordinate delay of three years in filing the complaint.

¶76

8 -

¶77

NC: 2025:KHC:24610 CRL.P No. 9586 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 11548 of 2022

¶78

HC-KAR

¶79

Already a complaint is given making the same allegations and the second complaint is not maintainable. The allegations made in the complaint are bald, without specifying the date place and time when the incident took place. Complainant is having illicit relationship with the husband of accused No.1 and in this connection, accused No.1 has filed a complaint against the complainant herein and for this reason, she has chosen to file a false complaint. Without any application of mind, the concerned police have registered the case. There are no material to constitute the offences alleged against the accused. Continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of the Court and pray to allow the petition.

¶80

In each petition, the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2/complainant and learned High Court Government Pleader representing the State have reiterated the complaint averments. They require full fledged trial. Disputed facts cannot be decided in a petition

¶81

9 - NC: 2025:KHC:24610 CRL.P No. 9586 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 11548 of 2022

¶82

HC-KAR

¶83

under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and pray to reject both petitions.

¶84

Heard arguments and perused the record.

¶85

So far as complaint filed by Raghavi against accused No.2 Sudha is concerned, she is suspecting that her husband Rajendra is having illicit relationship with Sudha, she has implicated her, in addition to Rajendra and his brother Raghavendra. Though it is alleged in the complaint that accused No.2 Sudha gave life threat to her, no specific date or place where she gave the said threat is forthcoming. So far as allegation under Section 498A of IPC is concerned, since accused No.2 is not related to accused No.1 Rajendra, the husband of complainant, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in U.Suvetha Vs State by Inspector of Police and Anr. ( U.Suvetha i)¹ , a girlfriend or a concubine of a husband is not a relative of the husband so as to attract the provisions of Section 498–A of IPC. Therefore the said provision is not applicable to

¶86

1 (2009) 6 SCC 757

¶87

10 - NC: 2025:KHC:24610 CRL.P No. 9586 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 11548 of 2022

¶88

HC-KAR

¶89

accused No.2. Except the self-serving statement of complainant, there are no material to connect accused No.2 to the allegations made and therefore the continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of

¶90

the process of the Court and therefore the criminal proceedings against accused No.2 Sudha is liable to be quashed.

¶91

Similarly, so far as complaint by Sudha against accused No.1 Raghavi in Cr.No.56/2022 of Chikkamagaluru Women Police Station are concerned, allegations against her are that, she used to call the complainant during day and night and gave threat. Even though she blocked her number, she and accused Nos.2 and 3 used to make frequent calls by other numbers.

¶92

It is pertinent to note that though the complainant was allegedly being harassed since 02.07.2018, she has chosen to file complaint on 09.05.2022, that too, after accused No.1 filed complaint

¶93

11 -

¶94

NC: 2025:KHC:24610 CRL.P No. 9586 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 11548 of 2022

¶95

HC-KAR

¶96

against her alleging illicit relationship with her husband. It

¶97

appears to be an after thought. Consequently, the continuation of the proceeding against accused No.1 amount to abuse of the process of the Court and as such it

¶98

is liable to be quashed and accordingly the following:

¶99

ORDER

¶100

(i) Crl.P.No.9586/2022 filed by accused No.1 Raghavi and Crl.P.No.11548/2022 filed by accused No.2 Sudha P, under Section 482 of Cr.P.C are hereby allowed.

¶101

(ii) The criminal proceedings against accused No.1 Raghavi in Cr.No.56/2022 on the file of II Addl.Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Chikkamagalur, for the offences punishable under Sections 354(D) & 504 r/w Section 34 of IPC is hereby quashed.

¶102

(iii) The criminal proceedings against accused No.2 Sudha P, in C.C.No.302/2022 on the

¶103