ORDER

This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused Nos.1 and

2 under Section 482 of CRPC for quashing the criminal proceedings in C.C No.50487/2022 arising out Crime No.246/2021 registered by Marathahalli police station, and charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, now pending on the file of XXIX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State and learned counsel for the respondent No.2.

3. The case of prosecution is that on the complaint of respondent No.2, the police registered FIR against the accused persons. It is alleged that respondent No.2 married petitioner No.1-accused No.1 on 04.05.2016. It is alleged that even before their marriage, there was dowry demand and harassment by petitioner No.1-accused No.1 and his parents, and it is continued even after the marriage. Her father transferred Rs.10 lakhs to the bank account of petitioner No.1-

accused No.1 even before and after the marriage. The petitioner No.1-accused No.1 never used to go for work and later, he stayed with her at Bangalore, and her father used to come and give amount for not troubling respondent No.2- complainant. All the expenses for immigration to Australia towards arrangement of work permit and visa were born by the father of respondent No.2. It is further alleged that petitioner No.1-accused No.1 used to behave strangely with her child by the leg on the floor to teach him discipline, poured cold water, slapping the child, etc. Petitioner No.1-accused No.1 e child and used to physically and mentally harassing the complainant and also sexually abusing her by showing her porn videos. In the year 2018, petitioner No.1-accused No.1 brought respondent No.2 to her parent's house at Bengaluru and said that if she wants to join him, her father should give him his retirement money, car and gold. Hence, to take action against accused persons. The police after registering FIR, investigated the matter and filed charge sheet, which is under challenge.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that he is not pressing the petition against petitioner No.1- accused No.1 and he is arguing only for petitioner No.2-

accused No.2. The submission of the Learned counsel for the petitioners is placed on record and the criminal petition is against petitioner No.1-accused No.1 is required to dismissed as not pressed.

5. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner No.2-accused No.2 contends that there is no specific allegation against petitioner No.2-accused No.2 in the FIR and even in the complaint. The alleged offence is nothing to do with the petitioner No.2-accused No.2. There is no allegation of demand of dowry and acceptance of dowry by petitioner No.2-accused No.2. There is no harassment on respondent No.2 by accused petitioner No.2-accused No.2 and the petitioners and respondent NO.2 were not at all staying together. Hence, prayed for quashing the charge sheet.

6. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 has contended that both petitioner No.1-son and petitioner No.2- mother together harassed the respondent No.2-complainant demanding dowry and Rs.10 lakhs has been paid to accused No.1 by way of deposit on transfer and also by way of cash. The matter requires investigation. There is specific allegation in the statement of witnesses that petitioner No.2-accused No.2 also demanded dowry. Petitioner No.2-accused No.2 used to sleep along with the couple and used to harass respondent No.2 mentally and physically. Therefore, the learned counsel has prayed for dismissing the petition.

7. Learned High Court Government Pleader has also opposed the petition.

8. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the records, especially, the complaint under the Domestic Violence Act proceedings in the complaint. There is no specific s