Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 20947
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1915/2017
BETWEEN:
DEBABRATA DEKA
S/O N.N.DEKA
NO.B-209, R.R.RESIDENY,
NEAR SOMASUNDRA PALYA LAKE,
BANGALORE-560 102.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI NAVEED AHMED, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
STATE BY KARNATAKA
BY BOMMANAHALLI POLICE STATION,
BANGALORE-560 068
REPRESENTED BY ITS SPP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU-560 001.
2.
GEETA DEKA
D/O PRAKASH TIWARI,
W/O DEBABRATA DEKA,
G.4, LEE WAY ENCLAVE,
HOSPALYA MAIN ROAD,
OPP. UJJALA FACTORY,
BANGALORE-560 068.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI VINAYAKA V.S., HCGP FOR R-1/STATE;
SRI N.S. VISHWANATH, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)
2
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO QUASH
THE FIR IN CRIME NO.402/2016 PENDING ON III ACMM,
BANGALORE, IN THE FILE OF 1ST RESPONDENT POLICE
STATION, DATED 11.08.2016 AT ANNEXURE-A CONSEQUENTLY
QUASH THE COMPALINT DATED 04.08.2016 FILED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT POLICE STATION,
AT ANNEXURE-B.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
In order to constitute the offence of cruelty under Section 498A of the IPC, the allegations must be specific and must provide details about how and in what manner the accused subjected the victim to cruelty.
Headnote:
CRIMINAL LAW - SECTION 498A IPC - CRUELTY - ESSENTIAL INGREDIENTS - ABSENCE OF - QUASHING OF FIR
Fact of the Case:
A husband was accused of subjecting his wife to cruelty, both mentally and physically, and of abusing her in filthy language. The wife alleged that the husband had also tried to take away their child from school forcibly. The husband filed a petition to quash the FIR, arguing that the allegations were false and that there was no evidence to support them.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the allegations made in the FIR were too general and did not provide any specific details about how or in what manner the husband had subjected the wife to cruelty. The court also noted that the husband had provided evidence that the marriage had been dissolved on the ground of cruelty, which further weakened the wife's case.
Issues: Whether the allegations made in the FIR were sufficient to constitute the offence of cruelty under Section 498A of the IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the allegations made in the FIR did not meet the essential ingredients of the offence of cruelty under Section 498A of the IPC. The court noted that the allegations were too general and did not provide any specific details about how or in what manner the husband had subjected the wife to cruelty. The court also noted that the husband had provided evidence that the marriage had been dissolved on the ground of cruelty, which further weakened the wife's case.
Final Decision: The court allowed the husband's petition and quashed the FIR.
FIR was lodged against the 2nd respondent alleging that
she was married to the accused in the year 2004 and after two
to three months from the date of marriage, the petitioner
subjected the 2nd respondent to cruelty both mentally and
physically and abused her in filthy language and thereafter she
started residing separately with the girl child. It is further
alleged that from past six months, the accused continued to
harass the 2nd respondent physically and mentally. It is further
alleged that the accused used to visit the school where the child
was studying and tried to take away the child and when she was
informed by the school Authorities, she had to rush to the school
to save the child and for the last two months, the accused is
coming near the house of the 2nd respondent and creating
3
problem. The police registered the FIR for the offence
punishable under Section 498A of IPC. Taking exception to the
same, this petition is filed.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that the allegation made in the FIR arises out of marital
discord and also the dispute with regard to custody of the child,
however, given a criminal texture so as to falsely implicate the
petitioner - accused. He further submits that in the absence of
essential ingredients to constitute the offence punishable under
Section 498A of IPC, the registration of FIR is without any
substance.
3.
The
learned
High
Court
Government
Pleader
appearing for the 1st respondent - State submits that the
allegation made in the FIR discloses the commission of offence
punishable under Section 498A of IPC and the veracity of the
allegation requires to be investigated and at this stage, the
registration of FIR cannot be interfered with and sought for
dismissal of the petition.
4
4.
I have examined the submissions of the learned
counsel appearing for the parties.
5.
A perusal of the FIR indicates that except omnibus
and general allegation, there is no specific allegation as to how
and in what manner, the petitioner-accused subjected the 2nd
respondent to cruelty both mentally and physically. The
allegation that the petitioner - accused tried to takeaway the
child from the school forcibly does not constitute the commission
of offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC.
6.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has
also placed on record the copy of the judgment passed in M C
No.3131/2016 by the III Addl. Prl. Judge, Family Court
Bengaluru, wherein the marriage of the 2nd respondent with the
accused has been dissolved on the ground of cruelty. Hence, in
the absence of essential ingredients so as to constitute the
commission of offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC, the
continuation of investigation would be an abuse of process of
law, since the probability of conviction of the petitioner - accused
is remote and bleak. Accordingly, I pass the following:
5
ORDER
i)
Criminal petition is allowed.
ii)
The impugned FIR in Crime No.402/2016 registered
by the Bommanahalli Police Station, Bangalore is hereby
quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
bkm
