Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points: A girlfriend or a woman with whom a man has had romantic or sexual relations outside of marriage cannot be construed to be a "relative" of the husband for the purposes of prosecution under Section 498A of the IPC (!) (!) (!) . For a case under Section 498A to be valid, the material on record must show that ill-treatment was meted out by the husband or a relative in connection with the non-fulfilment of a dowry demand (!) . Taking the allegations in the FIR or charge-sheet at face value, there is no averment or material showing that the appellant was concerned with causing harassment due to non-fulfilment of dowry demands (!) . The continuation of criminal proceedings against the appellant under these circumstances would amount to an abuse of the process of law (!) . The appeal was allowed, and the judgment and order of the High Court dismissing the quashing petition were quashed and set aside (!) [

Dechamma I. M. @ Dechamma Koushik vs State of Karnataka

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(SC) 1310

B. R. GAVAI, K. V. VISWANATHAN
Dechamma I. M. @ Dechamma Koushik – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Ms. K. V. Bharathi Upadhyaya, AOR Mr. Sufyan Hassan, Adv. Ms. Hema Malik, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. D. L. Chidananda, AOR

Judgement Key Points

Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points:

A girlfriend or a woman with whom a man has had romantic or sexual relations outside of marriage cannot be construed to be a "relative" of the husband for the purposes of prosecution under Section 498A of the IPC (!) (!) (!) .
For a case under Section 498A to be valid, the material on record must show that ill-treatment was meted out by the husband or a relative in connection with the non-fulfilment of a dowry demand (!) .
Taking the allegations in the FIR or charge-sheet at face value, there is no averment or material showing that the appellant was concerned with causing harassment due to non-fulfilment of dowry demands (!) .
The continuation of criminal proceedings against the appellant under these circumstances would amount to an abuse of the process of law (!) .
The appeal was allowed, and the judgment and order of the High Court dismissing the quashing petition were quashed and set aside (!) [

JUDGMENT

B.R. GAVAI, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. Though Respondent No.2 has been duly served with notice, she has chosen not to appear.

3. The present appeal arises out of the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, thereby dismissing the criminal petition filed by the present appellant for quashing the proceedings in Crime No. 339 of 2019 on the file of Court of Sr. Civil Judge and JMFC, Gundlupete, Chamarajnagar, which has registered Gundlupete P.S. Cr. No. 172 of 2019 as against the appellant for offence punishable under Sections 498A, 504, 109 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘IPC’) and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, against the appellant.

4. The facts, in brief, giving rise to the present appeal by way of special leave are as under:

4.1 On 19th April 2019, an FIR came to be lodged by respondent No.2 against her husband, namely, Adishetty, and Avinash Shetty (brother of her husband), Nataraju (paternal uncle of accused No.1), Prakash (son-in-law of the paternal uncle of accused No.1) and the appellant herein.

4.2 As per the said FIR, respondent No.2/complainant got married to one Adishetty on 6th Novemb

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2024 Supreme(SC) 1310

B. R. GAVAI, K. V. VISWANATHANDechamma I. M. @ Dechamma Koushik – AppellantVersusState of Karnataka – Respondent

Cases Referred (1)

Related Judgments

Dechamma I. M. @ Dechamma Koushik VS State of Karnataka - 2025 2 Supreme 379

Dara Lakshmi Narayana VS State of Telangana - 2025 1 Supreme 726

Rajesh Kumar Mishra S/o Late Radhamohan Mishra VS State of Chhattisgarh - 2022 Supreme(Chh) 606

Rakesh Boraiah S/o V. B. Boraiah VS State of Andhra Pradesh - 2023 Supreme(AP) 754

John Srampikal VS State of Andhra Pradesh - 2024 Supreme(AP) 1022

Boddu Rani VS State Of Andhra Pradesh

Roshni Yasmeen Shaik @ Shaik Roshni Yasmeen, D/o. Shaik Nazeer Basha vs State by Station House Officer, Mahila Police Station, Machilipatnam, Rep. by Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh - 2025 Supreme(AP) 393

Masanpally Meheresh vs State of Telangana - 2025 Supreme(Telangana) 1663

Belide Swagath Kumar VS State of Telangana - 2026 1 Supreme 559

Mr. Masanpally Meheresh vs The State of Telangana - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 64783

B. R. GAVAI, K. V. VISWANATHAN
Dechamma I. M. @ Dechamma Koushik – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent