The power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. should be exercised judicially, judiciously, cautiously, and sparingly to avoid miscarriage of justice and abuse of process of law.

JUDGMENT

K.Somashekar, J. - This is a petition filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.2,3 and 4 in C.C.No.162 of 2015 arose in Cr.No.44 of 2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A) and 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code seeking to quash the charge-sheet filed by the Respondent-SHO Mahila Police Station at Mysuru City pending before the Court of the 4th Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and JMFC, Mysore. Though the matter is posted for admission, with the consent of the learned counsel on both sides, the matter is taken up for final disposal.

2. It transpires from the case of the prosecution relating to Cr.No.44 of 2015 that the first respondent registered a case in Cr.No.44 of 2015 based on a complaint filed by Smt.S.Sindhu for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 506 r/w 34 of I.P.C. Subsequent to filing of a complaint by the complainant, the crime came to be registered and thereafter, the Investigating Officer took up the case for investigation and after thorough investigation has laid the charge-sheet in C.C.No.162 of 2015. The first accused in the aforesaid case had married the complainant on 06.02.2014 as per the customs prevailing in the Society. Subsequent to her marriage, due to physical disablement of accused No.1, he was unable to lead marital obligations but tortured his wife who is a defacto complainant in all the ways by assaulting her and also demanding her to bring dowry in terms of car and other things. It is further stated in the complaint that accused No.1 also misbehaved with his sister and his relationship with his sister is not like as brother and sister. The petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are the inlaws of the complainant and petitioner No.3 is the daughter of petitioner Nos.1 and 2 who arraigned as accused Nos.2, 3 and 4 respectively. It is further stated in the complaint that after harassment and torture, accused No.1 had set up a separate house at Kanakanagar, Mysuru on mortgaging his gold ring and chain for Rs.30,000/- on rental basis. At the time of opening of the house, complainant s parents had brought the chilly powder and other things, for which the accused abused and assaulted the complainant on the same night and tried to kill her, immediately she called her parents and also lodged a complaint at Kuvempunagar Police Station. The same has been reflected in the charge-sheet laid by the Investigating Officer in Cr.No.44 of 2015 relating to C.C.No.162 of 2015.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners through video conference and so also the learned HCGP appearing for Respondent No.1/State who is physically present before the Court.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there are no ingredients to constitute the offence against accused Nos.2 and 3 in C.C.No.162 of 2015 but on filing of a complaint by the complainant, the case has been registered in NCR No.346 of 2014, which is at Annexure E , the copy of the statement of accused No.1 who is the husband of the complainant and the endorsement issued by the police were also produced before this Court by the complainant, which are at Annexures - F and G. The counsel for the petitioners contended that the police have registered the case against the accused alleging that they have assaulted the complainant and also demanding her to bring dowry from her parents house. This allegation is nothing but a set up theory to implicate these accused in the alleged crime and also with an oblique motive just to harass the accused.

The second limb of the arguments is that the Hon ble Supreme Court has rendered a decision once again in the question, when issue or process can be quashed and has laid down: It may be safely held that in the following cases an order of the Magistrate issuing process against the accused can be quashed / set aside .

He submitted that in view of the above, no ingredients has been constituted to proceed with the case against the accused. But in the instant case, subsequent to filing of a complaint