Allegations under Section 498A must meet specific legal thresholds; trivial irritations do not constitute cruelty, and misuse of legal provisions in matrimonial disputes is subject to quashing.

ORDER

M. Nagaprasanna, J.

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the proceedings in C.C.No.19072 of 2022 pending before the XXXVII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Bangalore arising out of Crime No.35 of 2022 registered for offences punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short).

2. Facts adumbrated are as follows:-

The 2nd respondent/wife is the complainant and the petitioner/husband is accused No.1. The two get married on 29-05-2020. After about two months, the petitioner had to get back to United States of America as his H1B visa was to expire on 19-07-2020. Therefore, the petitioner leaves India to USA. It is the averment in the petition that on 21-01-2021, the complainant leaves the matrimonial house and then began to stay in a relatives' house. The petitioner further avers in the petition that efforts were made by the petitioner to get a visa so that the complainant could travel to USA. The first appointment that the petitioner took was on 13-10-2020. The complainant does not go to visa office for processing visa formalities. The second appointment was taken on 02-03-2021; again the complainant misses the same. On 07-05-2021 the 3rd appointment was taken. The complainant again misses the same. The 4th appointment was taken on 24-05-2021, the complainant misses the same too. The 5th appointment then emerges and visa is granted to the complainant on 22-09-2021. When the relationship between the two, according to the averment, turned irreconcilable, the petitioner/husband comes to India and files a petition seeking divorce in M.C.No. 6838 of 2021 before the Family Court and later, on 22-12-2021 also files a complaint before the jurisdictional Police against the wife alleging several acts. It is then on 03-02-2022 the impugned complaint is registered by the 2nd respondent/wife against the petitioner which becomes a crime in Crime No.35 of 2022 for offences punishable under Section 498A of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Act. The Police, after investigation, file a charge sheet before the concerned Court. The concerned Court, on the charge sheet, takes cognizance of the offences against the petitioner for the aforesaid offences and registers C.C. No. 19072 of 2022 in terms of its order dated 14-06-2022. It is the registration of criminal case is what has driven the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition.

3. Heard Sri C V Srinivasa, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri Harish Ganapathi, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1 and Smt xxxx, respondent No.2 in person.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner and the complainant get to know each other through an online matrimony website, as the petitioner was residing in USA and the complainant in Bangalore. After approval of both the families, the two get married. The petitioner travels to USA for renewal of visa purposes. Five attempts were made by the petitioner by seeking appointments to get the complainant to USA. It is his averment that she refused to go to USA. The learned counsel would vehemently submit that the wife has left no stone unturned in painting the petitioner black by getting him tested for all the parts of the body, which all went in vain, as the petitioner was clean and had suffered no problem. The wife was never intending to live with the husband and all that she wanted is his money. All efforts of conciliation failed between the two, as the wife demanded Rs. 3/- crores in lieu of settlement. He would submit that nowhere in the complaint there is any indication of demand of dowry. Therefore, Section 498A of the IPC or even Sections 3 and 4 of the Act can spring into action in the case at hand is his emphatic submission.

5. Per contra, the 2nd complainant/wife who appears in person vehemently contends that the petitioner/husband suffers from Sexually Transmitted Dis