SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Kar) 265

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M. NAGAPRASANNA, J.
Pramod R. S, S/o Suresh N – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka – Respondent
Criminal Petition No.1511 of 2023
Decided on : 02-06-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :SMT. YASHASWINI S, ADVOCATE
For the Respondent: SRI MAHESH SHETTY.

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

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 498A, 307 and 506 - Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 - Sections 3 and 4 - Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Section 12 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Registration of crime - Harassment of woman to meet unlawful demand - Petitioner is before Court calling in question registration of a crime – Enactment of legislature cannot be rendered illusory by a declaration that complaint would lose its significance for reason that it is registered immediately after receipt of a notice of divorce from hands of husband - Para 11.

Finding of the Court: Purpose in introducing chapter XX-A bringing in Section 498A in Indian Penal Code was with objective to prevent torture to a women by her husband or by relatives of husband - It was added with a view to punish such people aforesaid, who would meet out harassment or torture to wife to satisfy their unlawful demands of dowry - Enactment of legislature with purpose cannot be rendered illusory by a declaration that complaint would lose its significance for reason that it is registered immediately after receipt of a notice of divorce from hands of husband - Declaration of law made by co-ordinate Bench can at best be held to be applicable and restrictable, to facts obtaining in case - Submission of learned counsel that it is universally made applicable in terms of order is unacceptable, particularly qua facts obtaining in case at hand – Though proceedings therein were quashed at FIR stage, Court deem it appropriate not to accede to contention of learned counsel for petitioner that judgment should be followed and proceedings obliterated against petitioner.

Result: Petition dismissed.

ORDER :

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question registration of a crime in Crime No.61 of 2022 registered for offences punishable under Sections 498A, 307 and 506 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts in brief germane are as follows:-

The petitioner is the sole accused and the 2nd respondent is his wife, the complainant. The two get married on 19-04-2021. It is alleged that on certain torture, the 2nd respondent/ complainant leaves the matrimonial house on 14-08-2022. The petitioner then causes a legal notice upon the 2nd respondent seeking amicable settlement and resolution of the dispute between them for the purpose of dissolution of marriage. The said notice was caused on 13-10-2022. Later, the wife registers a complaint against the petitioner/husband on 1.12.2022 which becomes a crime in Crime No.61 of 2022. It is the registration of crime against the husband is what drives the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition.

3. Heard Smt. S. Yashaswini, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Mahesh Shetty, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the wife has registered the crime as a counterblast to the legal notice that the petitioner sends, seeking amicable settlement for dissolution of marriage. There are no ingredients that would become offences under Section 498A of the IPC. In the light of the husband sending a notice for divorce and the immediate registration of crime thereafter, the crime loses its significance. She would submit that this is the law laid down by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Petition No.201257 of 2019 and connected case decided on 18-04-2023 and therefore, the FIR should be quashed on the sole ground that the crime is registered after receipt of a notice seeking dissolution of marriage.

5. On the other hand, the learned High Court Government Pleader would submit that investigation has just commenced; there are grave allegations against the petitioner/husband for offences punishable under Section 498A and 307 IPC and, therefore, the proceedings should be permitted to be continued.

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

7. The issue now lies in a narrow compass. The petitioner and the 2nd respondent are the husband and wife who got married on 19-04-2021. It is the averment in the petition that on several allegations the wife leaves the matrimonial house on 14-08-2022. The petitioner then on 13-10-2022 causes a legal notice upon the wife wherein he projects himself to be suffering from mental trauma at the hands of the wife and seeks resolution of matrimonial dispute amicably and dissolution of marriage by mutual consent within 15 days. The narration in the notice is that the wife should desist from filing a false claim and initiating malicious proceedings against the husband or the family members. What is latent becomes patent on a perusal of the notice. The notice dated 13-10-2022, insofar as it is germane, reads as follows:

    “Under instructions from our client, Mr.Pramod R.S., S/o Mr.Suresh N., aged about 32 years, Residing at #10, Krishna Raj layout, J.P.Nagar, Bangalore – 560 076, this notice is issued to you in the following terms.

1. At the outset, it is placed on record that our client has instructed us to issue this Legal Notice with an intention to resolve the differences/dispute between you and our client amicably without precipitating the matter and anticipating amicable resolution of the dispute. Therefore, our client reserves liberty to explain the facts in detailed urge the all grounds in future correspondences or the proceedings if any commenced.

2. We are instructed to state that the marriage between you and our client was solemnized on 19th April 2021 in Jain Bhavan, Devan’s Raod, Lakshmip

      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

      Please visit our Training & Support
      Center or Contact Us for assistance

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon Back to top