Point of Law: Section 498A of IPC reads as husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.

ORDER :

The petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 are before this Court calling in question proceedings in C.C.No.15166 of 2020, pending before the XXX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.15 of 2020, registered for offences punishable under Sections 498A r/w. 34 of the IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

2. Heard Sri M.R.C. Manohar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Smt. K.P. Yashodha, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri K.S. Karthik Kiran, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2.

3. The facts in brief, as projected by the prosecution, are as follows:

The 1st petitioner is accused No.1 and 2nd and 3rd petitioners are accused Nos.2 and 3. The 2nd respondent is the complainant. The 1st petitioner is the husband of the complainant. The 1st petitioner and the complainant get married on 18.12.2019. The marriage between the 1st petitioner and the complainant turned sore immediately after marriage. The complainant stayed with the husband in the matrimonial house only for 28 days. Venting out various grievances, the complainant walks out and seeks to register two proceedings – one setting the criminal law in motion by registering a complaint before the jurisdictional Police on 05-02-2020, which becomes a crime in Crime No.15 of 2020 for offences punishable under Section 498A of the IPC and another proceeding in M.C.No.586 of 2020 filed under Section 12(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking annulment of marriage on the ground of cruelty. The police after investigation filed a charge sheet in the matter against the petitioners and filing of charge sheet leads the petitioners to this Court in the subject petition.

4. The petition having been entertained, an interim order is granted by this Court in terms of its order dated 14-09-2021 and the interim order is subsisting even as on date.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would contend with vehemence that 1st petitioner and the complainant get married on 18-12-2019, moved to Bengaluru and they reside at Bengaluru. The parents/petitioner Nos.2 and 3 continued to reside at Coorg/Ponnampet. The complainant/wife stayed at the matrimonial house only for 28 days and on the ground that the marriage had not consummated, initiated proceedings in M.C.No.586 of 2020 and at the same breath, registered a crime for offence under Section 498A of the IPC. The parents who were nothing to do with the issue have been dragged into the web of crime without any rhyme or reason. Even the 1st petitioner/husband is concerned, it is his submission that the allegations would not meet any of the ingredients of the offence punishable under Section 498A. He would seek quashment of the entire proceedings.

6. On the other hand, the learned counsel representing the 2nd respondent/complainant would seek to contend that the parents have deliberately got their son married to the complainant. The son/husband never showed any interest to develop physical relationship with the wife and, therefore, the wife was constrained to seek annulment of marriage on the ground that it amounts to cruelty. Though the marriage has been annulled in terms of the order dated 16-11-2022, in M.C.No.586 of 2020, the complainant would pursue the present proceedings as it amounts to cruelty for demand of dowry. He would seek dismissal of the petition.

7. The learned High Court Government Pleader would toe the lines of the learned counsel representing the 2nd respondent.

8. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the material on record.

9. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. They lie in a narrow compass as the relationship between the 1st petitioner and the complainant is an admitted fact and it is also admitted that they stayed together only for 28 days. It is the happenings in those 28 days that is what is projected by the complainant. The 1st petitioner