IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M. Nagaprasanna, J.
Vikram Vincent S/o Late A.M.John Vincent - Appellant
Vs.
The State Of Karnataka By Viveknagar Police Station Bengaluru - Respondent
Criminal Petition No.1675 Of 2021 C/W Writ Petition No.2678 Of 2022 (GM-RES)
Decided On : 25-05-2022
Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 226 –Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 498A, 377, 34 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 173(8) – Information Technology Act, 2000 – Sections 66E 67 – Specifically deal with cybercrime related to pornography – Report of police officer on completion of investigation – Unnatural offences – Companion petition in Criminal Petition is preferred by petitioner therein who is husband of petitioner in Writ Petition – Since both petitions arise out of a similar issue, as writ petition is filed by wife seeking further investigation and the husband seeking quashment of proceedings on filing of charge sheet, they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order – Held, Writ petition filed by wife contending that charge sheet filed by Police in C.C.No.57405 of 2019 does not make out any offence of Section 498A of IPC and, therefore, proceedings against husband should be quashed in its entirety – In view of elaborate reasons recorded hereinabove for directing further investigation, proceedings against husband, petitioner in the criminal petition No.1675/2021, cannot be quashed at this juncture – Even otherwise, on a perusal of the averments in petition filed by the husband insofar as it concerns Section 498A Cr.P.C., there is no document that is so unimpeachable placed on record by husband to demonstrate his innocence – Time for quashing the proceedings against husband even for Section 498A has not arisen – Therefore, Court decline to interfere with proceedings against husband even for offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC – Writ Petition allowed.
ORDER :
The petitioner in Writ Petition No.2678 of 2022 seeks the following prayer:
“(A) Issue writ of mandamus to Commissioner of Police, Bangalore City to issue instructions to cyber-crime Police Station Bangalore to continue the further investigation under Section 173(8) of the Cr.P.C. and to submit supplementary charge sheet in respect of offences under Section 377 IPC and Sections 66E and 67 of the IT Act within stipulated period of time. The supplementary charge sheet has to be submitted in Crime No.89 of 2017 which is registered in C.C.No.57405 of 2019 on the file of the 29th ACCM Court Bangalore in addition to the charge sheet filed on 26-09-2019 (Annexure-A).
(B) Grant such other reliefs which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice and equity.”
2. The companion petition in Criminal Petition No.1675 of 2021 is preferred by the petitioner therein who is the husband of the petitioner in Writ Petition No.2678 of 2022.
3. Since both the petitions arise out of a similar issue, as the writ petition is filed by the wife seeking further investigation and the husband seeking quashment of proceedings on filing of the charge sheet, they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order.
4. For the sake of convenience, the petitioner in Criminal Petition No.1675 of 2021 would be referred to as the ‘husband’ in the course of this order. The pleadings in Writ Petition No.2678 of 2022, which are common to both the petitions except the prayers, will be noticed in this order.
5. Brief facts leading to the seeking of the aforesaid prayer in Writ Petition No.2678 of 2022 are as follows:-
The petitioner/wife in the year 2013 was selected to pursue her PhD in the Indian Institute of Technology, Mumbai at which point in time the petitioner gets acquainted with Mr. Vikram Vincent who was also pursuing his PhD at IIT, Mumbai. Conversation between the two takes place for long years through the social media and ultimately, they fell in love and got married on 10-06-2015 at Bangalore. It is the case of the petitioner that right from the beginning of marriage the behaviour of Mr. Vikram Vincent, her husband was torturous for having anal sex/unnatural sex. It is contended that for the purpose of performance of such unnatural acts the husband used to abuse, assault and torture the petitioner. Becoming unbearable, after about three months of marriage, the petitioner leaves the place of the husband to reside with her parents at Raipur. The petitioner’s native was Raipur. After about 20 days the petitioner goes back to Mumbai to attend a lab at IIT, at which point in time, her husband again persuaded her to come back on an assurance that he would not behave in the manner in which he was behaving in the past.
6. The petitioner’s averment is that believing his words she got back to her husband, but there was no change in the behaviour of the husband but it got aggravated due to which, the petitioner permanently left the husband to reside with her parents on 4.01.2016. Later, it appears that the husband began to threaten her for her return to be with him, failing which he would leak all obscene pictures of her on social media. He also forwarded certain obscene pictures of her to the facebook account of her father and also to his WhatsApp number and also to two of her friends. It is at that juncture the petitioner registered a crime before the police at Raipur for offences punishable under Section 498A, 377, 34 of the IPC and Sections 66E and 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (‘the Act’ for short). Since all the incidents had happened at Bangalore, the Superintendent of Police, Raipur transferred the case to the Commissioner of Police, Bangalore to be investigated by the jurisdictional police, after which, the crime is registered at Bangalore for the offences afore-quoted.
7. The mother-in-law of the petitioner approaches this Court seeking annulment of entire proceedings on the score that she has no role played in the entire
Dayal Singh v. State Of Uttaranchal
State of W.B. v. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights
Bharati Tamang v. Union of India
Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh v. State of Gujarat
Point of law: Article 21 of Constitution not only takes within its fold, the enforcement of the rights of the accused but also the rights of the deceased.
The court emphasized the importance of fair and just investigation, clarified the power of further investigation under Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and highlighted the non-compou....
Further investigation without prior court permission is valid under Section 173(8) of CrPC, and such investigation does not violate the principle of double jeopardy under Article 20(2) of the Constit....
Quash of criminal proceedings - while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the High Court would not ordinarily embark upon an enquiry whether the evidence in question is reliable or ....
The judgment emphasizes the importance of fair investigation in ensuring fair trial as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It establishes that unless there is a serious irregularity....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.