Dismissed¶¶51

State of Karnataka v. Ananda

Karnataka HC4 Nov 2025CRL.RP/113/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Discharge of accused; criminal revision S.397 r/w S.401 Cr.P.C.; S.498A and S.306 r/w S.34 IPC; Ss.3 & 4 Dowry Prohibition Act; death note / suicide by hanging; prima facie material for discharge; Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander (2012) 9 SCC 460; Karnataka HC; CRL.RP No.113 of 2018; Ravi V Hosmani J.; SC No.976/2014; Cr. No.275/2014; Hulimavu Police Station; State Public Prosecutor; revision dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Despite submissions, the learned HCGP failed to indicate any prima facie material against accused nos.2 and 3. ¶¶49

State of Karnataka Vs Ananda — Dowry and Cruelty | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:44426 CRL.RP No. 113 of 2018

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 113 OF 2018

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HULIMAVU POLICE STATION, BENGALURU, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

[BY SRI HARISH GANAPATHY, HCGP (PH)]

¶11

AND:

¶12

ANANDA S/O NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT NO.24, SIDDAPPA LAYOUT, DODDAKALLASANDRA, BENGALURU - 560 062.

¶13

NARAYANAPPA S/O KONDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/AT PASALAVARAPPALI, YADAGARAHALLI POST, ADDAGAL MANDALA, SRINIVASAPURA TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 135.

¶14

Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

[BY SRI SUNIL S. RAO, ADVOCATE FOR

¶17

SRI T SESHAGIRI RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2 (PH)]

¶18

THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C BY THE S.P.P FOR THE STATE PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 07.10.2017 PASSED IN S.C.NO.976/2014 ON THE FILE OF COURT OF XLV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE

¶19

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC:44426 CRL.RP No. 113 of 2018

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

(CCH-46) DISCHARGING THE ACCUSED NO.2 & 3- RESPONDENTS HEREIN FOR THE OFFENCES P/US 498A,306 R/W 34 OF IPC.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

Challenging order dated 07.10.2017 passed by XLV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (CCH-46), allowing application filed for discharging accused no.2 and 3, this revision petition is filed.

¶27

Sri Harish Ganapathy, learned HCGP for petitionerState submitted, a complaint was filed by Sri Nagappa, stating that Smt.Usha (victim) had married Sri PN Srinath (accused no.1); Anand (Accused no.2) was her brother-in-law and Nagappa (accused no.3) was her father-in-law, while Roopa(accused no.4) was wife of one Prasad. It was alleged that accused no.1 was running travels business as well as parking fee contract at Apollo Hospital along with victim jointly. Accused no.1 was residing in apartment and victim had a daughter. Accused no.1 was already married and had two sons. He also had affair and married accused no.4, who was residing

¶28

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:44426 CRL.RP No. 113 of 2018

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

in a separate house. After third marriage, accused no.1 started ill-treating victim. In this regard several panchayats were held and that on night of 20.04.2014 victim informed complainant over mobile phone of accused no.1 and informed that accused no.1 and his family members were likely to do away with her life.

¶31

And on 21.04.2014 at 6.30 p.m. when he went to house of victim along with his wife, he found it locked. After breaking open lock, victim was found hanging from a ceiling fan. Suspecting that accused had killed victim and thereafter hung her body, complaint was lodge. It was registered as Cr.no.275/2014.

¶32

After investigation, charge-sheet was filed against accused no.1 to 4 for commission of offence punishable under Sections 498A and 306 r/w Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. After committal to Sessions Court, same was registered as SC no.976/2014. In said proceedings, accused filed application for discharge.

¶33

It was submitted, though prosecution had sought to

¶34

substantiate its charges with statement of 21 witnesses, which

¶35

¶36

NC: 2025:KHC:44426 CRL.RP No. 113 of 2018

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

would more than prima facie substantiate charges against accused, trial Court without proper consideration allowed application insofar as accused no.2 and 3 and rejected it respect of accused no.1 and 4. It was submitted, prosecution case was based on death note of victim which would implicate accused no.2 and 3 also. While passing impugned order, trial Court observed death note did not specifically implicate accused no.2 and 3. Such conclusion would not be justified, as same would be matter for trial. On said ground sought for allowing revision.

¶39

On other hand, Sri Sunil S Rao, learned counsel for accused no.2 and 3, opposed petition. It was submitted, complaint was vengeanceful against family member of accused no.1. It was submitted, victim and accused were residing in separate houses, in different places. Such being case, without any specific material, prosecution had sought to implicate accused no.2 and 3. Trial Court, on proper appreciation of facts and circumstances and finding prima facie case, proceeded to allow application of accused no.2 for discharge and there was no scope for interference in revision petition.

¶40

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:44426 CRL.RP No. 113 of 2018

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

Heard learned counsel, perused impugned order and material on record.

¶43

This revision petition is against order allowing application for discharge filed by accused no.2 and 3.

¶44

In their application specific contention urged was accused no.2 was brother of accused no.1 and residing near Konanakunte cross, at a distance of 12-14 Kms. from residence of victim, while accused no.3 was resident of Pasalavarapalli, Yedagarapalli Post, Addagal Mandal, Srinivasapura Taluk, Kolar District. It was stated, even as per complaint, their main grievance was victim had committed suicide due to alleged affair of accused no.1 with accused no.4. There are no specific allegations made against accused no.2 and 3. Therefore, subjecting them to trial would be wasteful.

¶45

While passing impugned order, trial Court referred to decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander & Anr. reported in (2012) 9 SCC 460, wherein it is held, if prosecution case was based on prima-facie material, application for discharge could not be entertained and accused had to stand trial.

¶46

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:44426 CRL.RP No. 113 of 2018

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

Thereafter, it scrutinized material on record and found that prosecution case to be primarily dependent on death note of victim. Contents of death note do not implicate accused no.2 and 3 for any offence. Hence, it allowed application insofar as Accused no.2 and 3, and rejected it insofar as accused no.1 and 4.

¶49

Though learned HCGP made fervent submissions against order discharging accused no.2 and 3, he failed to indicate prima facie material insofar as accused no.2 and 3. Thus, even applying ratio laid down in Amit Kapoor 's case, exercise of jurisdiction by trial Court while allowing application

¶50

for discharge would be fully in accordance with law.

¶51

No case for interference is made out. Revision petition is dismissed.

¶52

Sd/(RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE

¶53

Psg*

¶54

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41

State of Karnataka v. Ananda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Karnataka v. Ananda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arjun Chandra Vs Praveen Kumar K

M/S Jaya Engineering Works Vs Sri Nagaraj @ Nagarajan

Sri Vijayalakshmi Vs State of Karnataka by

Mr. Keshav Daga Vs Miss. Nilisha Maheshwari

Sri. Keshav G Vs Smt. Kala v

Basha @ Khaleel Basha Vs the State of Karnataka