Gangaraju Vs State of Karnataka

THIMMAIAH B G S/O GANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS RESIDING AT BARADI VILLAGE, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BARDI, MANDIGERE POST, NELAMANGALA DISTRICT, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 123

¶21

MAMATA T W/O VENKATESH G AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS RESIDING AT BARADI NELAMANGALA TALUK, BARDI MANDIGERE, BANGALORE RURAL BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 123

¶22

JAYASHREE H W/O THIMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS RESIDING AT BARADI, MANDIGERE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 123

¶23

CHANNEGOWDA B G S/O GANGADHARAIAH AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS

¶24

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:27469 CRL.P No. 12963 of 2024

¶25

HC-KAR

¶26

RESIDING AT NO.597/1 DASANAPURA HOBLI, BALEVEERANAHALI VILLAGE, SONDEKOPPA, BANGALORE NORTH BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 130

¶27

…PETITIONERS

¶28

(BY SRI. S.S. NAGANAND, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SMT. SUMANA NAGANAND, ADVOCATE)

¶29

AND:

¶30

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY WOMEN POLICE STATION, DODDABALLAPURA BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 561 203 REPRESENTED BY

¶31

THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶32

YASHODHA @ YASHASWINI W/O GANGARAJU AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS RESIDING AT HADYALU VILLAGE, MYLANAHALLI POST, NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 123

¶33

…RESPONDENTS

¶34

(BY SRI. B.N. JAGADEESHA, ADDL. SPP FOR R1 SRI. C.H. JADHAV, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. CHETHAN JADHAV, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶35

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO a) QUASH THE FIR DATED 25.09.2024 IN CR.NO.151/2024 ON

¶36

4 -

¶37

NC: 2026:KHC:27469 CRL.P No. 12963 of 2024

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

THE FILE OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, NELAMANGALA (ANNEXURE-A).

¶40

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

¶41

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶42

ORAL ORDER

¶43

The petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 8 are before the Court calling in question the registration of a crime in Crime No.151/2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 307, 504, 506 and 149 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

¶44

Heard the learned senior counsel, Sri.S.S. Naganand appearing for the petitioners; learned Additional State Public Prosecutor, Sri.B.N. Jagadeesha appearing for respondent No.1 and learned senior counsel, Sri.C.H. Jadhav appearing for respondent No.2.

¶45

3. Facts adumbrated are as follows:

¶46

3.1. Before embarking upon the consideration of the

¶47

issue in the lis , I deem it appropriate to notice the relationship between the protagonists to the lis . Petitioner No.1/accused No.1 is the husband of the complainant. The other

¶48

5 -

¶49

NC: 2026:KHC:27469 CRL.P No. 12963 of 2024

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 8 are the members of petitioner No.1's family or distant relatives as the case would be. Their description would not be necessary at this juncture.

¶52

3.2. Petitioner No.1/accused No.1 and the complainant get married on 18.11.2020. The marriage between petitioner No.1/accused No.1 and respondent No.2/complainant appears to have floundered and on floundering of the relationship, the complainant is said to have deserted accused No.1 and began to reside separately. Petitioner No.1/accused No.1 institutes proceedings for annulment of marriage, after which the impugned crime comes to be registered by the complainant. The co-ordinate Bench of this Court has granted an interim order of stay of further proceedings and therefore, the investigation has not yet proceeded.

¶53

The learned senior counsel Sri.S.S. Naganand appearing for the petitioners would vehemently contend that there is no allegation that would touch upon the ingredients of any of the offences so alleged against these petitioners. They

¶54

are without any rhyme or reason dragged into the web of proceedings. He would take this Court through the complaint

¶55

6 -

¶56

NC: 2026:KHC:27469 CRL.P No. 12963 of 2024

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

seeking to demonstrate that the events that have happened in

¶59

the year 2022 are projected to become a crime in the year 2024. If at all the complainant had been assaulted, the complainant ought to have registered a complaint immediately. It is registered long after the alleged incident of assault. He would further contend that all other members of the family who are not even connected with the life of the complainant are dragged into the web of proceedings. He would therefore, seek quashment of the entire proceedings on the aforesaid score.

¶60

Per contra , learned senior counsel Sri.C.H. Jadhav appearing for the complainant would vehemently refute his submission in contending that the matter is stayed at the stage of investigation itself and there is an allegation of trying to strangulate the wife and therefore the ingredients of the offences are clearly made out at least against accused Nos.1 and 2 - the husband and the father-in-law of the complainant, respectively. He would submit that the others have instigated the manner in which the father-in-law or the husband has behaved against the complainant. Therefore, would seek dismissal of the petition in its entirety.

¶61

7 -

¶62

NC: 2026:KHC:27469 CRL.P No. 12963 of 2024

¶63

HC-KAR

¶64

The learned Additional State Public Prosecutor,

¶65

Sri.B.N. Jagadeesha, appearing for respondent No.1 - State would toe the lines of the learned senior counsel for the 2^nd respondent in submitting that investigation would be required in the least in the case at hand.

¶66

I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned senior counsel and the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor and have perused the material on record.

¶67

The afore-narrated facts, dates and link in the chain of events are all a matter of record. They need not be reiterated. The issue at this juncture lies in a narrow compass as to whether the investigation must be permitted to be continued against these petitioners/accused Nos. 1 to. 8. The entire issue gets triggered from the registration of the complaint. I therefore deem it appropriate to notice the complaint. The complaint reads as follows:

¶68

"�ೆ,

¶69

��ೕ� ವೃತ� ಅರ�ಕ��ೆ

¶70

�ೊಡ�ಬ�ಾ�ಪ�ರ ಮ��ಾ �ಾ�ೆ

¶71

�ೊಡ�ಬ�ಾ�ಪ�ರ

¶72

8 -

¶73

NC: 2026:KHC:27469 CRL.P No. 12963 of 2024

¶74

HC-KAR

¶75

ೆಂಗಳ$ರು �ಾ&'ಾಂತರ ()ೆ*

¶76

ಇಂದ, .&ೕಮ/ ಯ1ೆ2ೕಧ 4ೆ5 ಆ7 W/o ಗಂಗ8ಾಜು, ಬರ: �ಾ&ಮ ಕಸ ಾ 4ೋಬ< ಮಂ=�ೆ8ೆ �ೕ�> ?ೆಲಮಂಗಲ Aಾಲೂಕು ೆಂಗಳ$ರು �ಾ&'ಾಂತರ ()ೆ

¶77

BಾCD,

¶78

Eಷಯ : ನನH ಮತು� ನನH ಗಂಡನ ಕುಟುಂಬದವರು ವರದJ�ೆ ಮತು� ಆK� ಆBೆ�ಾL ನನHನುH Mೕಸ:ಂದ ಮದುNೆ 'ಾ=Oೊಂಡು ನನH ಗಂಡP�ೆ ಮAೊ�ಂದು ENಾಹ ಸಂಬಂಧ 4ೊಂದುವ ಉ�ೆSೕಶ:ಂದ ?ಾನು ಇದOೆU ಒಪW�ೇ ಇರುವ Oಾರಣ:ಂದ ನನ�ೆ �ೈ�ಕ ಮತು� 'ಾನKಕNಾL �ಂBೆ Pೕ= ನನ�ೆ ಮತು� ನನH ಕುಟುಂಬದವ��ೆ Zಾ&ಣ ೆದ�Oೆ 4ಾ[ರುವ ಬ�ೆ.

¶79

'ಾನ]8ೆ ,

¶80

ಈ _ೕಲUಂಡವ�ಾದ ?ಾನು :?ಾಂಕ:18/11/2020 ರಂದು ನನH Aಾತ(ಗಂಗಪW) ಅ(` (Nೆಂಕಟಲ�ಮa) 4ಾಗು ನನH ಗಂಡ ಗಂಗ8ಾಜು 4ಾಗು ನನH ಗಂಡನ ಅಣb ಅ/ � ೆಯ8ಾದ (Nೆಂಕcೇd ಮಮAಾ, /ಮaಯ] ಜಯ.&ೕ) ಅವರ ಒAಾ�ಯದಂAೆ 4ಾಗೂ ನನH Aಾe ಮತು� ತಂ�ೆಯವರ ಒfW�ೆಯಂAೆ ನನH Aಾeಯ ಸCಂತ ತಮa?ಾದ ಗಂಗ8ಾಜು?ೊಂ:�ೆ E.E. ಎ�. ಕhNೆhಷh 4ಾi, ?ೆ ಮಂಗಲ, :?ಾಂಕ: 18/11/2022 ೆ<�ೆ\ 9 ಗಂcೆ ಇಂದ 10 ಗಂcೆ ಸಮಯದ�* ENಾಹNಾLರುAೆ�ೕ?ೆ .

¶81

?ಾನು ENಾಹ ಪjವkದ�* M.Com E�ಾ]lಾ]ಸ 'ಾಡು/�ದS ಸಮಯದ�* ನನH Aಾeಯ ತಂ�ೆ ಗಂಗಪW ನವರು ಹಲNಾರು ಾ� ನಮa ಮ?ೆ�ೆ ಬಂದು ನನH ತಂ�ೆ Aಾemಂ:�ೆ PನH ಮಗಳನುH ?ಾನು ನನH ಮಗP�ೆ ಮದುNೆ 'ಾ=Oೊಳn�Aೆ�ೕ?ೆ ಎಂದು ಒAಾ�ಯ 'ಾ=ದSರು. 4ಾಗು ನನH Aಾeಯ ತವರು ಮ?ೆ ಸಂಬಂಧNಾದS�ಂದ Pೕವ� ೇರ oಾ�ಗೂ ಮದುNೆ 'ಾ= Oೊಡ ಾರದು ?ಾNೇ ಮದುNೆ 'ಾ=Oೊಳn�Aೆ�ೕNೆ ಎಂದು Aಾ[ೕತು 'ಾ=ದSರು. ನನ�ೆ 2017ರ�* [E ಸಮBೆ] oಾLದುS([E Oೇ<ಸುವ�ದು ಕDa oಾLದುS, ಈ Epಾರವ� ನನH Aಾತನ ಮ?ೆಯ ಪ&/mಬq ಸದಸ]�ಗೂ �ೊ/�ದುS ತದ ನಂತರವ� ನನH Aಾತನ ಮ?ೆಯವರು ಮದುNೆ ಪ&Bಾ�ಪ 'ಾ=ದSರು. ನನH ಮಗP�ೆ ಮದುNೆ 'ಾ=Oೊಳn�Aೆ�ೕ?ೆ ಎಂದು ಒAಾ�ಯ 'ಾ=ದ ನಂತರ ನನH Aಾe ತಂ�ೆ ನನH ಗಂಡ?ಾದ ಗಂಗ8ಾಜು ಮತು� ನನH Aಾತನ

¶82

9 -

¶83

NC: 2026:KHC:27469 CRL.P No. 12963 of 2024

¶84

HC-KAR

¶85

ಕುಟುಂಬವರನುH ನಮa ಮ?ೆ�ೆ ಕ�K ನನ�ೆ [E ಸಮBೆ] oಾLರುವ EಷಯವನುH ಪj/k /<Kದ ನಂತರವj ನನH ಗಂಡ 4ಾಗು ಅವರ ಕುಟುಂಬದವರು ನನ�ೆ [E ಸಮBೆ] ಇರುವ�ದು ಅವ��ೆ oಾವ��ೇ ತರ Aೊಂದ8ೆ ಇಲ* ಮದುNೆ 'ಾ= Oೊ= ಎಂದು 4ೇ<ದ ನಂತರ ನನH Aಾe ತನH ತವರು ಮ?ೆ�ೆ ಒ�ೆ��ಾಗ� ಎಂದು ನನH ತಂ�ೆ Aಾe ಸದ� ENಾಹOೆU ಒfW�ೆ Pೕ=ರುAಾ�8ೆ . ಸದ� ENಾಹ ಸಮಯದ�* ��ಯರು ENಾಹ PಶreKದಂAೆ 4ಾಗೂ ನನH ಗಂಡ PSI Oೆಲಸದ�ದುS, ಸದ� ನನH ಯಜ'ಾನ ಮತು� ಅವರ ಕುಟುಂಬದ ಸದಸ]8ಾದ ಗಂಗಪW, Nೆಂಕಟಲ�sಮa. Nೆಂಕcೇd, ಮಮAಾ, /ಮaಯ], ಜಯ.&ೕ, ಮತು� ಚ?ೆHೕ�ೌಡ ಅವರ ೇ=OೆಯಂAೆ ವರP�ೆ 10 ಲ� ನಗದು ಹಣ, 25 �ಾ&ಂ vನHದ ಕ/�ನ ಸರ, 25 �ಾ&ಂ Oೈ pೈನು, 20 �ಾ&ಂ ತೂಕದ ಎರಡು ಉಂಗುರ ಮತು� ನನH 'ಾವ?ಾದ ಗಂಗಪWನವ��ೆ 6 ಲ� ನಗದು Pೕ=ರುAೆ�ೕNೆ . 4ಾಗೂ ನನH ತಂ�ೆ Aಾeಯವರು ನನ�ೆ 350 �ಾ&ಂ vನH Pೕ=ರುAಾ�8ೆ . 200 �ಾ&ಂ ಎರಡು )ಾಂw pೈನು, 8 Bೆx ಓ)ೆ , ೨ ಉಂಗುರ, ಮತು� 500 �ಾ&ಂ ೆ<� ಒಡNೆ Pೕ=ರುAೆ�ೕNೆ , 4ಾಗೂ ನನH ಮದುNೆ�ಾL ಸು'ಾರು 38 ಲ� ರೂಗಳನುH ಖಚುk 'ಾ= ಸದ� ನನH ಗಂಡ ಮತು� ಅವರ ಕುಟುಂಬದವರ ಇpೆ|ಯಂAೆ ಅದೂS�oಾL 'ಾಡುNೆ 'ಾ= Oೊ}>ರುAಾ�8ೆ . ಮದುNೆoಾದ ನಂತರ ಸು'ಾರು ಎರಡು /ಂಗಳnಗಳ Oಾಲ ನನHನುH pೆ?ಾHL ?ೋ=Oೊಂ=ರುAಾ�8ೆ . :?ಾಂಕ 13/1/2021 ರಂದು 'ಾನಸ ಎಂಬ ಹುಡುL ನನ�ೆ ~ೕh 'ಾ=ದೂ& (mob:9632525244) ನನH ಗಂಡನ •ೆ&ಂ€ ಎಂದು 4ೇ< ಸಂOಾ&ಂ/ ಹಬqOೆU Ed 'ಾಡ)ೆಂದು 4ೇ< 'ಾತ?ಾ=ದಳn ತದ ನಂತರ ನನH ಗಂಡ 4ಾಗು 'ಾನಸ ಎಂಬ ಹುಡುL ಪ&/:ನ ~ೕh _Bೇ• 'ಾ=Oೊಂಡು ಸಂಪkಕದ�ದರು. ನನH ಗಂಡ ನನH ‚ೊAೆ oಾವ��ೇ �ೕ/ 4ೆಂಡ/ƒಂಬ lಾವ?ೆಯನುH ವ]ಕ� ಪ=ಸು/�ರ�ಲ. ಪ&/:ನ 'ಾನಸ ಎಂಬ ಹುಡುLಯು ~ೕh _Bೇ• 4ಾಗು 4ೊರಗ„ೆ lೇ}oಾಗು/�ದSರು. 4ಾಗು ಮ?ೆಯ� 8ಾ/& Nೇ�ೆ 'ಾನಸ<�ೆ ಪತ& ಬ8ೆಯು/�ದSರು ಈ EpಾರOೆU ನನ�ೆ „ೌx ಬಂದು ನನH ಗಂಡನನುH ಪ�1ೆH 'ಾ=ದOೆU ನನ�ೆ Pೕನು ಈ Epಾರವ� oಾ��ಾದರೂ /<Kದ8ೆ ಆತaಹAೆ] 'ಾ=Oೊಳn�Aೆ�ೕ?ೆ ಎಂದು 4ೇ< ರೂ… ನ�* ೆi> ಕ=�ೆ 4ಾ[Oೊಂಡು (ೕರುOೊಂ=ರುವ ಶ8ಾ 4ಾ[ Oೊಂಡು ?ಾಟಕ 'ಾ= 4ೆದ�K ೆದ�K 'ಾನKಕ �ಂBೆ 'ಾಡು/ದSರು. ?ಾನು 'ಾನಸ ಎಂಬ ಹುಡುL�ೆ ನನH ಗಂಡP�ೆ ~ೕh ಮBೇ• 'ಾಡುವ��ಾಗ� ನನುH 4ಾಗು ನನH ಗಂಡನ ಮಧ] ಬರುವ��ಾಗ� 4ಾಗು ನನುH ಸಂBಾರ 4ಾಳn 'ಾಡುವ��ಾಗ� 'ಾಡ ೇಡ ಎಂದು 4ೇ<ದ ನಂತರವ�. ಆOೆ 4ಾಗು ನನH ಗಂಡ ಅವರ ಸಂಬಂಧವನುH ಮುಂದುವ8ೆಸು/�ದSರು. ಈ Epಾರವ� ನನH ಗಂಡನ ಮ?ೆಯವ�ಗೂ 4ಾಗು ನನH Aಾe ತಂ�ೆಯವ�ಗೂ /<K�ೆS ಇ�ಾದ ನಂತರ 'ಾನಸ (M :9632525244) ಎಂಬ ಹುಡುL ನನH ಗಂಡನ ‚ೊAೆಯ�* ಅ†ರಮ ಸಂಬಂಧ 4ೊಂ:ರುವ ಮ��ೆ ನನ�ೆ ~ೕh 'ಾ= :?ಾಂಕ 3/5/2021 ರಂದು ನನH ಬ< 'ಾತ?ಾಡ ೇಕು ಅದOೆU ನಮa ಮ?ೆ�ೆ ಬರುವ��ಾL 4ೇ<ದಳn.

¶86

ನನH 'ಾವ ಮತು� ನನH ಗಂಡನ ಅಣb Nೆಂಕcೇd ಅವ��ೆ Oೊ8ೊನ ಆLದS�ಂದ ನನHನುH ನನH ತವರು ಮ?ೆ�ೆ ಕ<KದSರು ಆ :ನ ?ಾನು ನನH ತವರು ಮ?ೆ 4ಾ]ಡಳn ನ�* ಇದS Oಾರಣ ?ಾನು

¶87

10 -

¶88

NC: 2026:KHC:27469 CRL.P No. 12963 of 2024

¶89

HC-KAR

¶90

ನನH ಗಂಡನ ತಂ�ೆ ಗಂಗಪW ನವ��ೆ 4ಾಗು ನನH ಗಂಡನ ಅಣb Nೆಂಕcೇd ಅವ��ೆ /<K�ೆS ಡೂ]} �ೆ 4ೋಗುAೆ�ೕ?ೆ ಎಂದು 4ೇ< 4ೋLದS ನನH ಗಂಡನನುH ಆOೆ ('ಾನಸ) ಅವಳ ‚ೊAೆ ಕ8ೆದುOೊಂಡು ನಮa ಊ��ೆ ಬಂ:ದSಳn. ನಮa ಊ��ೆ ನನH ಗಂಡ ಗಂಗ8ಾಜು ಮತು� 'ಾನಸ ಇಬqರು ಬಂ:ದSರು. ನhನ ಗಂಡನ ಅಣb?ಾದ Nೆಂಕcೇd ಸಹ ನಮa ಊ��ೆ ಬಂ:ದSರು. ಆ ಸಂದಭkದ�* ನನH ಗಂಡ 4ಾಗು 'ಾನಸ ಎಂಬ ಹುಡುL ನನ�ೆ , ?ಾನು ಮತು� 'ಾನಸ ಇಬqರು ಮದುNೆಗೂ Mದ�Pಂದಲೂ f&ೕ/ 'ಾಡು/ � ೆSೕNೆ .

¶91

ಆOೆ ನನH ಗಂಡP�ೆ Pೕನು PನH 4ೆಂಡ/�ೆ Epೆrೕದನ Oೊಟು> ನನH ಮದುNೆoಾಗು ಎಂದು 4ೇ<ದS�ಂದ ನನH ಗಂಡ ನನ�ೆ Pೕನು ಈ ಮದುNೆ ಅ=� ಪ=ಸ ೇಡ ಸುಮaನ ಒfWOೊ ಎಂದು ಒAಾ�ಯ 'ಾ=ದರು . 4ಾಗೂ Pನ�ೆ ೇOಾದ8ೆ Epೆrೕದನ Pೕ= ಅವಳನುH ( 'ಾನಸ ) ಮದುNೆ ಆಗುAೆ�ೕ?ೆ ಎಂದು 4ೇ<ರುAಾ�8ೆ . ?ಾನು ಮತು� ನನH ತಂ�ೆ Aಾe E8ೋ‰K�ಾಗ ಗಂಗ8ಾಜು ಮತು� 'ಾನಸ ಏನು ೇOಾದರೂ 'ಾ=Oೋ ಈ ಸಂಬಂಧವನುH oಾ�ಂದಲೂ ತ„ೆಯಲು Bಾಧ]Eಲ ಅ=�ಪ=ಸಲು ಬಂದ8ೆ ನನಗೂ ಮತು� ನನH ಕುಟುಂಬದವ�ಗೂ Zಾ&ಣ Aೆ�ೆಯುವ��ಾL ೆದ�Oೆ 4ಾ[ರುAಾ�8ೆ . ನನH ಗಂಡP�ೆ ನನH ತಂ�ೆ Aಾeಯು ಒ�ೆ�ಯ �ೕ/ ಕೂ�K ಬು:S 'ಾತು 4ೇ<ದSರು Oೇಳ�ೆ ಅ�ೇ �ೕ/ ಮುಂದುವ8ೆಸು/�ದSರು . ಆದರೂ ಸಹ ?ಾನು ನನH ಕುಟುಂಬದ EpಾರNಾದ Oಾರಣ 4ಾಗೂ ನನH ಸಂBಾರ ಉ<KOೊಳn�ವ Oಾರಣ:ಂದ ಎಲ*ವನುH ಸಹ?ೆ ಮತು� Aಾ�ೆaeಂದ ಸ�KOೊಂಡು ಬಂ:ರುAೆ�ೕ?ೆ . ತದನಂತರ ನನH ಗಂಡ 4ಾಗು 'ಾವ ( Aಾತ ) Oಾರು Aೆ�ೆದುOೊಳn�ವ ಸಲುNಾL ನನ�ೆ PನH ತವರು ಮ?ೆ�ೆ 4ೋL 8 ಲ� ಹಣ Aೆ�ೆದುOೊಂಡು ಬರುವಂAೆ 4ೇ<ದರು . ಈ ಸಂದಭkದ� ನನH ತಂ�ೆ Aಾe�ೆ 4ೇ< 5 ಲ� ರುಗಳn ನಗದು ಹಣವನುH ನನH ತಂ�ೆ Aಾeಯು Aೆ�ೆದುOೊಂಡು ಬಂದು ನನH ಗಂಡP�ೆ Oೊ}>ರುAಾ�8ೆ . ಇ�ಾದ ಸCಲW :ನOೆU ನನH 'ಾವನವರು ನನH Aಾeeಂದ ಒಟು> ಕುಟುಂಬದ ಆK�** ೆೆೆೆ ಸಂಬಂ‰KದಂAೆ 4ಾಗೂ ನನH Aಾeಯ ಹ[U�ೆ ಸಂಬಂ‰KದಂAೆ ಹಕುU Pವೃ/� ಪತ& ಬ8ೆKOೊಂಡು ಬರುವಂAೆ ಒAಾ�ಯ . 'ಾ=ದರು . ಈ ಸಂದಭkದ� ?ಾನು ನನH ತಂ�ೆ Aಾe�ೆ /<ಸ)ಾL ನನH ತಂ�ೆ , Aಾe ನನH ಮ?ೆ�ೆ ಬಂದು ?ಾ]ಯ ಪಂpಾe/ 'ಾ=ದರು . ಈ ಸಂದಭkದ�* ನನH ಅAೆ� ಮತು� 'ಾವನವರು ( ಅಜ ಮತು� ಅ( ) ಗ)ಾcೆ Aೆ�ೆದು ನನH ಮಗ ��ೕ� ಇ)ಾ‹ೆಯ ಉನHತ ಹು�ೆSಯ�*�ಾS?ೆ . ಇವP�ೆ ಸು'ಾರು 3 Oೋ} ವರದJ�ೆ Oೊಟು> ಮತು� ಒಂದು ಮ?ೆ Oೊಟು> ಮದುNೆ 'ಾ= Oೊಡಲು 8ೆ= ಇರುವ 4ೆಣbನುH Œಟು> ನನH ಮಗಳನುH ಮದುNೆ 'ಾ=Oೊಂ=ರುAೆ�ೕ?ೆ ಎಂದು ಅNಾ]pಾ] ಶಬSಗ<ಂದ ೈದರು . ಈ ಸಂದಭkದ�* ನನH ತಂ�ೆAಾe ಮತು� ಪಂpಾe/�ಾರ8ೆಲ*ರೂ Bೇ� ಕುಟುಂಬ ಒ„ೆದು4ೋಗ ಾರ�ೆಂದು 8ಾ( ಸಂ•ಾನ 'ಾ= ನನHನುH ನನH ಗಂಡನ ಮ?ೆಯ�* Œಟು> 4ೋLದSರು . ಇ�ಾದ ನಂತರವj ನನH ಗಂಡನ� oಾವ��ೇ ಬದ)ಾವ�ೆ ಇಲ*�ೆ ಪ&/ :ನ ನನH ಗಂಡ 4ಾಗು ಗಂಡನ ಕುಟುಂಬದವರು ಅNಾ]pಾ] ಪದಗ<ಂದ Pಂ:K �ೈ�ಕ 4ಾಗು 'ಾನKಕNಾL �ಂBೆ Pೕಡು/ದSರು . 4ಾಗು ಊಟ /ಂ= 'ಾ=Oೊಂಡು /ನHಲು ಸಹ Œಡ�ೇ ನನH ಗಂಡನ ಅ/�** ೆ ಯ8ಾದ ೆೆೆ ಮಮAಾ ಜಯ.&ೕ 4ಾಗು ನನH ಅAೆ� ( ಅ(` ) ನನH _ೕ)ೆ ಜಗಳ 'ಾ= ' ಮ?ೆಯ� oಾರು ಕೂಡ ನನH*

¶92

11 -

¶93

NC: 2026:KHC:27469 CRL.P No. 12963 of 2024

¶94

HC-KAR

¶95

‚ೊAೆ 'ಾತ?ಾಡ ಾರದು ಎಂದು 4ೇ< 4ಾಗು ನನHನುH ಮ?ೆಯ� oಾರು ನನH mೕಗ Žೇಮ ?ೋ=Oೊಳn/�ರ�ಲ . ?ಾನು ಈ EpಾರOೆU ನನH ಗಂಡ 4ಾಗು ನನH ಗಂಡನ ಮ?ೆಯವರ ಬ< Oೇ<ದSOೆU Pೕನು ನಮa ಮ?ೆಯ�* ಇರ ೇOೆಂದ8ೆ Pೕನು PನH ತವರು ಮ?ೆeಂದ ದುಡು� Aೆ�ೆದುOೊಂಡು ಾ ಎಂದು 4ೇ<ದSರು . ?ಾವ� oಾರು PನHನು ?ೋ=Oೊಳn�ವ�:ಲ* Pೕನು OೆಲಸOೆU 4ೋL ದು=ದು Oೊಂಡು ಬಂದು /ನುH ಎಂದು 4ೇ<ದSರು . ಈ �ೕ/ 'ಾನKಕ �ಂBೆ ಇಂದ ೇಸತು� ನನH ಗಂಡ 4ಾಗು ನನH ಗಂಡನ ತಂ�ೆ Aಾeಯ ಒfW�ೆ _ೕ)ೆ 1/6/2022 �ಂದ ?ೆಲಮಂಗಲದ 1ಾ)ೆಯ�* OೆಲಸOೆU Bೇ�Oೊಂಡು OೆಲಸOೆU 4ೋಗು/�ದS . OೆಲಸOೆU 4ೋLದS ನಂತರವj ಮ?ೆಯ�* ನನ�ೆ ಊಟ /ಂ= 'ಾ=Oೊಂಡು /ನHಲು Œಡ�ೇ ನನH ಗಂಡನ ಅಣb ಅ/&�ೆಯಂ:ರು ( Nೆಂಕcೇd ಮಮAಾ ಮತು� /ಮaಯ] ಜಯ.&ೕ ) ನನH _ೕ)ೆ ಜಗಳ 'ಾ= 4ೊ„ೆಯು/�ದSರು . 4ಾಗು ನನH ಗಂಡ 4ಾಗು ನನH ಗಂಡನ ತಂ�ೆ Aಾe�ೆ ನನH _ೕ)ೆ ಇಲ* ಸಲದ pಾ= 'ಾತುಗಳn 4ೇ< ಮ?ೆಯ� ನನH _ೕ)ೆ ಜಗಳ 'ಾ=K ೈದು 4ೊ„ೆದು ಪ&/:ನ ?ೆಮa: ಇಲ*�ಾ�ೆ �ಂBೆ 'ಾಡು/�ದSರು . 4ಾಗು 1/2 ಎಕ8ೆ ಜDೕh ಬ8ೆKOೊಂಡು ಾ ಎಂದು ನನHನುH ನನH ತವರು ಮ?ೆ�ೆ ಕ<KದSರು . :?ಾಂಕ 1/1/2024 ರಂದು ನನH ಗಂಡP�ೆ ಅವ•ತNಾeತು . ಆಗ ಖುದುS ?ಾ?ೇ ಆಸWAೆ&ಯ�ದುS ಅವರ ಆ8ೈಕ 'ಾಡು/�ಾSಗ ನನH ಅAೆ� 'ಾವ 4ಾಗೂ ನನH ಗಂಡನ ಅಣb ಅ/�** ೆ ಯವರು ೆೆೆ ಆಸWAೆ&ಯ� ನನH _ೕ)ೆ Pೕನು ಬಂದ :ನ:ಂದ ನಮa ಮ?ೆ�ೆ Oೇ„ಾL�ೆ . ಆದS�ಂದ Pೕನು ಎ)ಾ*ದರೂ 4ೋL ?ೇಣು 4ಾ[Oೊಂಡು Bಾe ಎಂದು ೈ:ರುAಾ�8ೆ . 4ಾಗು ಆಸWAೆ&ಯ� ನhನ ಗಂಡನನುH ?ೋ=Oೊಳ�ಲು ಅ=�ಪ=ಸು/�ದSರು ತದ ನಂತರ ಮ?ೆ�ೆ ಬಂದ_ೕಲೂ ನನH ಗಂಡನ mೕಗŽೇಮ ?ೋ=Oೊಳ�ಲು Œಡ�ೇ ನನH ಗಂಡನ Aಾe ತಂ�ೆ 4ಾಗು ನನH ಗಂಡನ ಅಣb ಅ/�** ೆ ಯರು ೆೆೆ ಅ=� ಪ=ಸು/�ದSರು . :?ಾಂಕ 8/1 /2024 ಆಸWAೆ& ಇಂದ =� pಾ•k 'ಾ=KOೊಂಡು ಮ?ೆ�ೆ ಬಂ�ಾಗ ನನH Aಾeಯು ಕೂಡ ನನH ‚ೊAೆ ನನH ಗಂಡನ ಮ?ೆ�ೆ ಬಂ:ದSರು . ನನH ಗಂಡ ನನH Aಾeಯ ಸCಂತ ತಮa?ಾLರುವ Oಾರಣ ಒಂದು Nಾರಗಳ Oಾಲ ನನH ಗಂಡನ mೕಗŽೇಮ ?ೋ=Oೊಳ�ಲು ನನH ‚ೊAೆ ಇದSರು . ಈ ಸಮಯದಲೂ ಕೂಡ ನನH ಗಂಡನ ಮ?ೆಯವರು ನನH Aಾeಯ _ೕ)ೆ ಜಗಳ 'ಾ= 4ೊ=ಯುವ�ದOೆU 4ೋಗು/�ದSರು . 4ಾಗು ಅNಾ]ಚ] ಪದಗ<ಂದ Pಂ:ಸು/�ದSರು . ಆದರೂ ಕೂಡ ನನH Aಾe ನನ�ೋಸUರ ಎಲ*ವನುH ಸeKOೊಂ=ದSರು . :?ಾಂಕ 24/1/2024 ರಂದು ನನH Aಾe ಊ��ೆ ( 4ಾ]ಡಳn ) NಾZಾ� 4ೋLದSರು . ತದ ನಂತರವj ?ಾನು ನನH ಗಂಡP�ೆ ಊಟ /ಂ= Oೊಟ>8ೆ ನನH ಗಂಡನ ಅ/�* ೆ ಯರು ( ೆೆೆ ಮಮAಾ ಮತು� ಜಯ.&ೕ ) Pೕನು PನH ಗಂಡP�ೆ ಊಟ /ಂ= Oೊಡ ಾರದು . ಮತು� PನH ಗಂಡನ ಬ< 'ಾತ?ಾಡ ಾರದು , PನH ಗಂಡನನುH ?ಾNೇ ?ೋ=Oೊಳn�AೇNೆ . Pೕನು PನH ತವರು ಮ?ೆ�ೆ 4ೋಗು ಎಂದು ಜಗಳ 'ಾಡು/�ದSರು , 4ಾಗು ನನH ಗಂಡ ಕೂಡ ?ಾನು Oೊಟ> ಊಟ /ಂ= Pೕರು oಾವ�ದನೂH Aೆ�ೆದು Oೊಳ��ೆ ?ಾನು Oೊ}>ದುS ŒBಾ[ ಅವರ ಅ/� ೆ ಯರು ೆೆೆ Oೊ}>ದSನುH 'ಾತ& /ನುH/�ದSರು . ಆಸWAೆ&ಯ�* ಇ�ಾSಗ ನನH ಗಂಡ ನನH ‚ೊAೆ 4ಾಗು ನನH Aಾeಯ ‚ೊAೆ 4ಾಗು ನನH ಕುಟುಂಬದವರ ‚ೊAೆ pೆ?ಾHL 'ಾತ?ಾ=Oೊಂಡು ?ಾವ� Oೊಟ> ಊಟ /ಂ= ಎಲ*ವ�ನುH /ನುH/�ದSರು . ಮ?ೆ�ೆ ಬಂದ _ೕ)ೆ ಆ �ೕ/ 'ಾಡು/�ದSರು .

¶96

12 -

¶97

NC: 2026:KHC:27469 CRL.P No. 12963 of 2024

¶98

HC-KAR

¶99

ನನH ಗಂಡನ ಅಣb Nೆಂಕcೇd ನನH ಗಂಡನನುH ಮ?ೆ _ೕ)ೆ ೇ8ೆ ರೂಮH� ಇ�KOೊಂ=ದSರು . ನನH ಗಂಡನ ತಂ�ೆ Aಾe 4ಾಗು ಮ?ೆಯವ8ೆಲ*ರೂ Pೕನು PನH ಗಂಡನ ಬ< 4ೋಗ ಾರದು Pೕನು ಒಬq�ೇ BೆZೆ8ೇx ಆL ಇರು ಎಂದು 4ೇ< ಜಗಳ 'ಾಡು/�ದSರು . ಈ EpಾರOೆU ಮAೆ� :?ಾಂಕ 12/02/2024 ರಂದು ಆ :ನ ೆ<�ೆ\ 7 ಘಂcೆಯ ಸಮಯದ� ನನH ಗಂಡ 4ಾಗೂ ನನH ಗಂಡನ ಮ?ೆಯವರು ನನH _ೕ)ೆ ಜಗಳ 'ಾ= , ನನH ಗಂಡ ನನH ಬಲಗ„ೆ [E lಾಗOೆU ಬಲ�ೈನ�* ತ)ೆ /ರುಗುವಂAೆ 4ೊ„ೆದರು , ಆಗ ?ಾನು ಅ)ೇ ಕುKದು Œ�ೆS . ಆ ನಂತರ ?ಾನು [E ?ೋವ� ಇದS Oಾರಣ ಆಸWAೆ&�ೆ Aೋ�ಸಲು Oೇ<ದರು oಾರು Aೋ�ಸ�ಲ , Oೊ?ೆ�ೆ ?ಾನು ನನH ತಂ�ೆ Aಾeಯವ��ೆ /<Kದ ನಂತರ ?ಾನು ಆಸAೆ�ೆ 4ೋದ_ೕ)ೆ ನನH ತಂ�ೆ Aಾeಯ ನನ�ೆ v[Aೆ‘ Oೊ=K ಕ<Kದರು . ಈ �ೕ/ ನನH ಗಂಡ 4ಾಗು ನನH ಗಂಡನ ತಂ�ೆ ನನH _ೕ)ೆ ಹ)ೆ 'ಾ= 4ಾಗೂ ನನH _ೕ)ೆ ��ೕ� �ಾ�ೆ ಯ� ಎರಡು ದೂರು Pೕ=ರುAಾ�ರ ?ೆಲಮಂಗಲ ��ೕ� �ಾ�ೆಯ�* ನನಗು ಮತು� ನನH ಗಂಡ 4ಾಗು ಅವರ ಕುಟುಂಬದವ��ೆ ಅ?ೊHೕ ನHNಾL ಸಂBಾರ 'ಾ=Oೊಂಡು 4ೋL ಎಂದು 4ೇ< ಕ<Kದರು . ಕೂಡ ನನH ಗಂಡ 4ಾಗು ನನH ಗಂಡನ ಕುಟುಂಬದವರು ಅ�ೇ pಾ<ಯನುH ಮುಂದುವ8ೆಸು/�ದSರು :?ಾಂಕ 6/5/2024 ರಂದು ಮ•ಾ]ಹH 12 ರ ಸಮಯದ� ನನH 'ಾವ8ಾದ ಗಂಗಪW Pೕನು ಸತ�8ೆ ನನH ಮಗP�ೆ ಮAೊ�ಂದು ಹುಡುL ‚ೊAೆ ಮದುNೆ 'ಾಡುAೆ�ೕ?ೆ , ಎಂದು 4ೇ< ಅNಾಚ] ಶಬSಗ<ಂದ ೈದು ನhನ ಕತು� �ಸು[ Bಾeಸಲು ಪ&ಯತH ಪಟ>ರು ಸಂದಭkದ�* ?ಾನು [ರುvದ�ಂದ 4ೊರLನ ಜನ��ೆ Oೇ<ಸುತ�** ೆ ƒಂದು ೆೆೆ ನನH 'ಾವನ ಎರಡ?ೇ BೊBೆ ಜಯ.&ೕ ಬಂದು Œ=Kದಳn . ಈ ಸಂದಭkದ� ಸ4ಾಯOಾUL ಸದ� ಬರ: �ಾ&ಮದ ��ಯವ8ಾದ ಮುP8ಾ_ೕ�ೌಡ ಮತು� ಅವರ ಪ/Hಯವರ ಬ< ಕೂಡ)ೇ 4ೋL 4ೇಳ)ಾL ಸದ� ಮುP8ಾ_ೕ�ೌಡ ಅವರು ನನH ತಂ�ೆ Aಾe�ೆ ~ೕh 'ಾ= /<Kದರು .*

¶100

4ಾ�ೇ 7/5/2024 ರಂದು ನನH ತಂ�ೆ Aಾe�ೆ ~ೕh 'ಾ= ನನ�ೆ ನನH ಗಂಡ ಮತು� ಕುಟುಂಬದವರು vತ&�ಂBೆ Pೕಡು/�ದುSದರ ಬ�ೆ\ ಬಂದು ಬು:S 4ೇ< 4ೋಗ)ೆಂದು ಕ8ೆK�ಾಗ ನನH 'ಾವ ( Aಾತ ) ಮತು� ಅAೆ� ( ಅ( ) ಯವರು ನನH ತಂ�ೆ Aಾeಯವ��ೆ ಅNಾಚ] ಶಬSಗ<ಂದ ೈದು ನನH Aಾe�ೆ ನನH ಅ( Aಾತ Mದಲ?ೇ ಮಗ Nೆಂಕcೇd 4ಾಗೂ ಅವರ ಪ/H ಮಮAಾ , ಎರಡ?ೇ ಮಗ /ಮaಯ] 4ಾಗೂ ಅವರ ಪ/H ಜಯ.&ೕ ಇವರುಗಳn ನನH Aಾe ಮತು� ನನHನುH Bಾeಸುವ ಉ�ೆSೕಶ:ಂದ ಕತು� �ಸುಕಲು ಪಟ>ರು . ನನH ಗಂಡನ Mದಲ?ೇ ಅಣb?ಾದ Nೆಂಕcೇd ಮತು� ನನH 'ಾವನ ಅಣbನ ಮಗ?ಾದ ಚ?ೆHೕ�ೌಡ ( ಬಳEೕರನಹ<� ) ನನಗು 4ಾಗು ನನH Aಾe�ೆ 4ೊ„ೆದು ಹ)ೆ 'ಾಡಲು ಬಂ:ದSರು . 4ಾಗು ನನH Aಾe�ೆ PನH ಮಗಳನುH oಾವ��ೇ OಾರಣಕೂU ಸಂBಾರ 'ಾ=ಸುವ�:ಲ , ಮತು� PನH ಮಗಳ (ೕವನವ?ೆHೕ 4ಾಳn 'ಾಡುAೆ�ೕNೆ ಎಂದು ೆದ�K ಹ)ೆ* 'ಾ=ದSರು . pೆ?ೆHೕ�ೌಡ ಅವರು ನನH 'ಾವ 4ಾಗು ನನH ಗಂಡನ ಅಣb ಅ/�** ೆ ಯಂ:��ೆ ೆೆೆ pಾ= 'ಾತುಗಳನುH 4ೇ< Oೊಟು> ನನH _ೕ)ೆ ಜಗಳ 'ಾ=ಸು/�ದSರು . ಈ ಸಂದಭkದ� ?ಾನು ನನH AಾeಯನುH Œ=KOೊಳ�ಲು 4ೋ�ಾಗ ಇವರುಗಳn ನನ�ೆ ಮತು� ನನH Aಾe�ೆ _ೖ Oೈ�ೆ 4ೊ„ೆ:ರುAಾ�8ೆ . ಈ ಸಂದಭkದ� ಊ�ನ**

¶101

13 -

¶102

NC: 2026:KHC:27469 CRL.P No. 12963 of 2024

¶103

HC-KAR

¶104

�ಾ&ಮಸ’ರು ಬಂದು ಬು:S 4ೇ<ದರು . ಆಗ ನನH Aಾe ಆಸWAೆ&�ೆ 4ೋL v[Aೆ‘ ಪ„ೆದುOೊಂಡು ತನH ಮ?ೆ�ೆ NಾZಾ� 4ೋLದSರು . ನನH ಗಂಡನ ಅಣbಂ:ರು Nೆಂಕcೇd ಮತು� /ಮaಯ]ನವರು ಅNಾಚ]ಶಬSಗ<ಂದ ೈದು ನನ�ೆ ಮvrPಂದ 4ೊ„ೆಯಲು ಮುಂ�ಾಗು/�ದSರು . ಇವರ 4ೆಂಡ/ಯ8ಾದ ಮಮAಾ ಮತು� ಜಯ.&ೕಯವರು ಇವರುಗಳn ಕೂಡ ಇವರ ‚ೊAೆ Bೇ� ನನHನುH ಅNಾ]pಾ]ಶಬSಗ<ಂದ Pಂ:ಸು/�ದSರು 4ಾಗೂ 4ೊ„ೆಯು/�ದSರು . ನನ�ೆ ಊಟ 'ಾಡಲು ಅ=� 'ಾಡು/�ದSರು . Pೕರು ಸಹ ಕು=ಯಲು Œಡ�ೆ ಅ=�ಪ=ಸು/�ದSರು . Nೆಂಕcೇd ಮತು� ನನH 'ಾವ ಗಂಗಪW ( Aಾತ ) ?ಾವ� ನಮa ಅಮaP�ೆ ಹು}>ದ8ೆ Pೕನು 4ೇ�ೆ ಸಂBಾರ 'ಾಡು/�ೕoಾ ?ೋ„ೋಣNೆಂದು ೆದ�Oೆ 4ಾಕು/�ದSರು . ಸದ� ನನH ಗಂಡನ ಕುಟುಂಬದ ಸದಸ]ರು Pೕಡು/�ರುವ ವರದJ�ೆ [ರುಕುಳOೆU ಸಂಬಂ‰KದಂAೆ Bಾಕಷು> ಾ� ?ಾ]ಯ ಪಂpಾಯ/ 'ಾ=ದರೂ oಾವ ಪ&mೕಜನವj ಆLರುವ�:ಲ . ಆದರೂ ನನH ಗಂಡ ಮತು� ಗಂಡನ ಕುಟುಂಬದವರು ನನHನುH ಅವರ ಮ?ೆ�ೆ Bೇ�K Oೊಳ��ೆ ನನಗೂ 4ಾಗೂ ನನH ಕುಟುಂಬದವ�ಗೂ 'ಾನKಕNಾL �ಂBೆ Pೕಡು/�ದSರು .*

¶105

ನನH ಗಂಡನ ತಂ�ೆ Aಾeoಾದ ಗಂಗಪW ಮತು� Nೆಂಕಟಲ�sಮa ಇವರ ಮಕU�ಾದ Nೆಂಕcೇd /ಮaಯ] ಮತು� ಅವರ 4ೆಂಡ/ಯ8ಾದ ಮಮAಾ , ಜಯ.&ೕ ನನH ಗಂಡ ಅಕ&ಮ ಸಂಬಂಧ 4ೊಂ:ರುವ ಮಂಡ] ()ೆಯ 'ಾನಸ ఎంబ ಹುಡುLmಂ:�ೆ ಅ?ೊHೕನ]NಾLದುS , 4ಾಗೂ ನನH ಗಂಡ ಆOೆmಂ:�ೆ ಎರಡ?ೇ ಮದುNೆ 'ಾ=Oೊಳ�ಲು ?ಾನು ಒfW�ೆ PೕಡುವಂAೆ ಒAಾ�ಯ'ಾ=ರುAಾ�8ೆ . 4ಾಗೂ ನನH ಗಂಡ ಮತು� ಗಂಡನ ಕುಟುಂಬದವರು ನನ�ೆ ಇPHಲದ vತ&�ಂBೆ Oೊಟು> ಮAೆ� ಮAೆ� ವರದJ�ೆ ತರಲು ಒAಾ�ಯ 'ಾಡು/�ರುAಾ�8ೆ .

¶106

ಆದS�ಂದ ಈ ಮೂಲಕ ತಮa�* Eನಂ/K Oೊಳn�ವ��ೇ?ೆಂದ8ೆ ಈ _ೕ)ೆ /<Kರುವ ನನH ಗಂಡ 4ಾಗೂ ಗಂಡನ ಮ?ೆ ಯವರ _ೕ)ೆ ಸೂಕ� Oಾನೂನು �ೕತ] ಕ&ಮ ಜರುLK ನನ�ೆ ಸೂಕ� Oಾನೂನು ರ��ೆ Pೕಡ ೇOೆಂದು ಈ ಮೂಲಕ ತಮa�* Oೇ<Oೊಳn�/ � ೆSೕ?ೆ ."

¶107

(Emphasis added)

¶108

A perusal at the complaint would clearly indicate that,

¶109

omnibus statements of overt acts committed by the accused Nos.3 to 8 are made in the complaint. There is no specific overt

¶110

act by accused Nos.3 to 8. It is not in dispute that the accused Nos.4 to 8 did not reside with the family and are all distant

¶111

14 -

¶112

NC: 2026:KHC:27469 CRL.P No. 12963 of 2024

¶113

HC-KAR

¶114

relatives. They are dragged into the web of proceedings without any rhyme or reason.

¶115

Permitting further investigation qua accused Nos.3 to 8 would become an abuse of the process of the law and run foul of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of KAHKASHAN KAUSAR @ SONAM v. STATE OF BIHAR¹ , wherein it is held as follows:

¶116

“….. …..

¶117

Issue involved

¶118

10. Having perused the relevant facts and contentions made by the appellants and respondents, in our considered opinion, the foremost issue which requires determination in the instant case is whether allegations made against the appellant in-laws are in the nature of general omnibus allegations and therefore liable to be quashed?

¶119

11. Before we delve into greater detail on the nature and content of allegations made, it becomes pertinent to mention that incorporation of Section 498-AIPC was aimed at preventing cruelty committed upon a woman by her husband and her in-laws, by facilitating rapid State intervention. However, it is equally true, that in recent times, matrimonial litigation in the country has also increased significantly and there is a greater disaffection and friction surrounding the institution of marriage, now, more than ever. This has resulted in an increased tendency to employ provisions such as Section 498-

¶120

1 (2022) 6 SCC 599

¶121

15 -

¶122

NC: 2026:KHC:27469 CRL.P No. 12963 of 2024

¶123

HC-KAR

¶124

AIPC as instruments to settle personal scores against the husband and his relatives.

¶125

12. This Court in its judgment in Rajesh Sharma v. State of U.P. [ Rajesh Sharma v. State of U.P. , (2018) 10 SCC 472 : (2019) 1 SCC (Cri) 301] , has observed : (SCC pp. 47879, para 14)

¶126

“ 14 . Section 498-A was inserted in the statute with the laudable object of punishing cruelty at the hands of husband or his relatives against a wife particularly when such cruelty had potential to result in suicide or murder of a woman as mentioned in the Statement of Objects and Reasons of Act 46 of 1983. The expression “cruelty” in Section 498-A covers conduct which may drive the woman to commit suicide or cause grave injury (mental or physical) or danger to life or harassment with a view to coerce her to meet unlawful demand. [ Explanation to Section 498-A.] It is a matter of serious concern that large number of cases continue to be filed under Section 498-A alleging harassment of married women. We have already referred to some of the statistics from the Crime Records Bureau. This Court had earlier noticed the fact that most of such complaints are filed in the heat of the moment over trivial issues. Many of such complaints are not bona fide. At the time of filing of the complaint, implications and consequences are not visualised. At times such complaints lead to uncalled for harassment not only to the accused but also to the complainant. Uncalled for arrest may ruin the chances of settlement.”

¶127

13. Previously, in the landmark judgment of this Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar [ Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar , (2014) 8 SCC 273 : (2014) 3 SCC (Cri) 449] , it was also observed : (SCC p. 276, para 4)

¶128

“ 4 . There is a phenomenal increase in matrimonial disputes in recent years. The institution of marriage is greatly revered in this country. Section 498-AIPC was introduced with avowed object to combat the menace of harassment to a woman at the hands of her husband and his relatives. The fact that Section 498-AIPC is a cognizable and non-bailable offence has lent it a dubious place of pride amongst the provisions that are used as weapons rather than shield by disgruntled wives. The simplest way to harass is to get the husband and his relatives arrested under this provision. In quite a number of cases, bedridden

¶129

16 - NC: 2026:KHC:27469 CRL.P No. 12963 of 2024

¶130

HC-KAR

¶131

grandfathers and grandmothers of the husbands, their sisters living abroad for decades are arrested.”

¶132

14. Further in Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand [ Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand , (2010) 7 SCC 667 : (2010) 3 SCC (Cri) 473] , it has also been observed : (SCC pp. 67677, paras 32-36)

¶133

“ 32 . It is a matter of common experience that most of these complaints under Section 498-AIPC are filed in the heat of the moment over trivial issues without proper deliberations. We come across a large number of such complaints which are not even bona fide and are filed with oblique motive. At the same time, rapid increase in the number of genuine cases of dowry harassment is also a matter of serious concern.

¶134

33 . The learned members of the Bar have enormous social responsibility and obligation to ensure that the social fibre of family life is not ruined or demolished. They must ensure that exaggerated versions of small incidents should not be reflected in the criminal complaints. Majority of the complaints are filed either on their advice or with their concurrence. The learned members of the Bar who belong to a noble profession must maintain its noble traditions and should treat every complaint under Section 498-A as a basic human problem and must make serious endeavour to help the parties in arriving at an amicable resolution of that human problem. They must discharge their duties to the best of their abilities to ensure that social fibre, peace and tranquillity of the society remains intact. The members of the Bar should also ensure that one complaint should not lead to multiple cases.

¶135

34 . Unfortunately, at the time of filing of the complaint the implications and consequences are not properly visualised by the complainant that such complaint can lead to insurmountable harassment, agony and pain to the complainant, accused and his close relations.

¶136

35 . The ultimate object of justice is to find out the truth and punish the guilty and protect the innocent. To find out the truth is a Herculean task in majority of these complaints. The tendency of implicating the husband and all his immediate relations is also not uncommon. At times, even after the conclusion of the criminal trial, it is difficult to ascertain the real truth. The courts have to be

¶137

17 -

¶138

NC: 2026:KHC:27469 CRL.P No. 12963 of 2024

¶139

HC-KAR

¶140

extremely careful and cautious in dealing with these complaints and must take pragmatic realities into consideration while dealing with matrimonial cases. The allegations of harassment of husband's close relations who had been living in different cities and never visited or rarely visited the place where the complainant resided would have an entirely different complexion. The allegations of the complaint are required to be scrutinised with great care and circumspection.

¶141

36 . Experience reveals that long and protracted criminal trials lead to rancour, acrimony and bitterness in the relationship amongst the parties. It is also a matter of common knowledge that in cases filed by the complainant if the husband or the husband's relations had to remain in jail even for a few days, it would ruin the chances of an amicable settlement altogether. The process of suffering is extremely long and painful.”

¶142

15. In Geeta Mehrotra v. State of U.P. [ Geeta Mehrotra v. State of U.P. , (2012) 10 SCC 741 : (2013) 1 SCC (Civ) 212 : (2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 120] it was observed : (SCC p. 749, para 21)

¶143

“ 21 . It would be relevant at this stage to take note of an apt observation of this Court recorded in G.V. Rao v. L.H.V. Prasad [ G.V. Rao v. L.H.V. Prasad , (2000) 3 SCC 693 : 2000 SCC (Cri) 733] wherein also in a matrimonial dispute, this Court had held that the High Court should have quashed the complaint arising out of a matrimonial dispute wherein all family members had been roped into the matrimonial litigation which was quashed and set aside. Their Lordships observed therein with which we entirely agree that : (SCC p. 698, para 12)

¶144

‘ 12 . … There has been an outburst of matrimonial dispute in recent times. Marriage is a sacred ceremony, the main purpose of which is to enable the young couple to settle down in life and live peacefully. But little matrimonial skirmishes suddenly erupt which often assume serious proportions resulting in commission of heinous crimes in which elders of the family are also involved with the result that those who could have counselled and brought about rapprochement are rendered helpless on their being arrayed as accused in the criminal case. There are many other reasons which need not be mentioned here for not encouraging matrimonial

¶145

18 -

¶146

NC: 2026:KHC:27469 CRL.P No. 12963 of 2024

¶147

HC-KAR

¶148

litigation so that the parties may ponder over their defaults and terminate their disputes amicably by mutual agreement instead of fighting it out in a court of law where it takes years and years to conclude and in that process the parties lose their “young” days in chasing their cases in different courts.’

¶149

The view taken by the Judges in this matter was that the courts would not encourage such disputes.”

¶150

16 . Recently, in K. Subba Rao v. State of Telangana [ K. Subba Rao v. State of Telangana , (2018) 14 SCC 452 : (2019) 1 SCC (Cri) 605] , it was also observed that : (SCC p. 454, para 6)

¶151

“ 6 . … The courts should be careful in proceeding against the distant relatives in crimes pertaining to matrimonial disputes and dowry deaths. The relatives of the husband should not be roped in on the basis of omnibus allegations unless specific instances of their involvement in the crime are made out.”

¶152

17. The abovementioned decisions clearly demonstrate that this Court has at numerous instances expressed concern over the misuse of Section 498-AIPC and the increased tendency of implicating relatives of the husband in matrimonial disputes, without analysing the long-term ramifications of a trial on the complainant as well as the accused. It is further manifest from the said judgments that false implication by way of general omnibus allegations made in the course of matrimonial dispute, if left unchecked would result in misuse of the process of law. Therefore, this Court by way of its judgments has warned the courts from proceeding against the relatives and in-laws of the husband when no prima facie case is made out against them.

¶153

18 . Coming to the facts of this case, upon a perusal of the contents of the FIR dated 1-4-2019, it is revealed that general allegations are levelled against the appellants. The complainant alleged that “all accused harassed her mentally and threatened her of terminating her pregnancy”. Furthermore, no specific and distinct allegations have been

¶154

19 -

¶155

NC: 2026:KHC:27469 CRL.P No. 12963 of 2024

¶156

HC-KAR

¶157

made against either of the appellants herein i.e. none of the appellants have been attributed any specific role in furtherance of the general allegations made against them. This simply leads to a situation wherein one fails to ascertain the role played by each accused in furtherance of the offence. The allegations are, therefore, general and omnibus and can at best be said to have been made out on account of small skirmishes. Insofar as husband is concerned, since he has not appealed against the order of the High Court, we have not examined the veracity of allegations made against him. However, as far as the appellants are concerned, the allegations made against them being general and omnibus, do not warrant prosecution.

¶158

19 . Furthermore, regarding similar allegations of harassment and demand for car as dowry made in a previous FIR Respondent 1 i.e. the State of Bihar, contends that the present FIR pertained to offences committed in the year 2019, after assurance was given by the husband Md. Ikram before the learned Principal Judge, Purnea, to not harass the respondent wife herein for dowry, and treat her properly. However, despite the assurances, all accused continued their demands and harassment. It is thereby contended that the acts constitute a fresh cause of action and therefore the FIR in question herein dated 1-4-2019, is distinct and independent, and cannot be termed as a repetition of an earlier FIR dated 11-12-2017.

¶159

20 . Here it must be borne in mind that although the two FIRs may constitute two independent instances, based on separate transactions, the present complaint fails to establish specific allegations against the in-laws of the respondent wife. Allowing prosecution in the absence of clear allegations against the appellant in-laws would simply result in an abuse of the process of law.

¶160

21 . Therefore, upon consideration of the relevant circumstances and in the absence of any specific role attributed to the appellant-accused, it would be unjust if the appellants are forced to go through the tribulations of a trial i.e. general and omnibus allegations cannot manifest in a situation where the

¶161

20 -

¶162

NC: 2026:KHC:27469 CRL.P No. 12963 of 2024

¶163

HC-KAR

¶164

relatives of the complainant's husband are forced to undergo trial. It has been highlighted by this Court in varied instances, that a criminal trial leading to an eventual acquittal also inflicts severe scars upon the accused, and such an exercise must, therefore, be discouraged. ”

¶165

(Emphasis supplied)

¶166

Insofar as the accused Nos. 1 and 2 are concerned

¶167

the husband and the father-in-law, there are allegations that would touch upon the ingredients of the offences so alleged, as the complaint narrates that an attempt was made by the husband and the father-in-law to strangulate the complainant. In that light, investigation against the two, in the least, must be permitted to be continued reserving liberty to knock at the doors of this Court in the event the final report would be filed and the final report would go against them. Insofar as the other accused are concerned, the crime needs to be obliterated.

¶168

For the aforesaid reasons, the following:-

¶169

ORDER

¶170

(i) The Criminal petition is allowed in part.

¶171

(ii) The proceedings qua petitioner Nos.3 to 8/accused Nos.3 to 8 in Crime No.151/2024 pending before

¶172

21 -

¶173

NC: 2026:KHC:27469 CRL.P No. 12963 of 2024

¶174

HC-KAR

¶175

the Principal Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) and JMFC Court, Nelamangala, Bangalore Rural District stands obliterated.

¶176

(iii) The investigation against qua petitioner Nos.1 and 2/accused Nos. 1 and 2 in Crime No.151/2024 pending before the Principal Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) and JMFC Court, Nelamangala, Bangalore Rural District stands sustained.

¶177

(iv) Liberty is reserved to accused Nos.1 and 2 to knock at the doors of this Court in the event a final report is filed by the jurisdictional Police and the final report goes against them. All contentions then would remain open to be considered.

¶178

Ordered accordingly.

¶179

Sd/(M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

¶180

Bsv List No.: 2 Sl No.: 29

Gangaraju v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gangaraju 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B.V. Rajeev Gowda Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Kalpana Vs State of Karnataka by

B.V. Rajeev Gowda Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Suman N P Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Chandrashekara I v Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Jaya S Vs State of Karnataka by