ORDER

The private complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C.

was filed by respondent No.1 alleging that, at the instigation of the petitioner-accused, her husband used to subject her with cruelty. It is further alleged that on 26.02.2013 her husband accidentally died on the railway track, and inspite of the death of her husband, the petitioner-accused mother-in-law used to harass and abuse her over phone. Learned Magistrate referred the complaint to the police for investigation under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. The Police after investigation submitted the 'B' report with the learned Magistrate, stating there is no material available against the petitioner-accused to substantiate that the petitioner-accused subjected respondent No.1 to cruelty. Respondent No.1 filed protest petition to the B-Report submitted by the police. The learned Magistrate after recording the sworn statement, registered the case against the petitioner- accused for the offences punishable under Sections

498A, 504, 506 of IPC. Taking exception of the same, this petition is filed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the absence of any material except on the general and omnibus allegations, the cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate is impermissible. He further submits that the private complaint was filed to wreck vengeance and with revengeful intent since a case is registered against respondent No.1 for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC. He further submits that the learned Magistrate without rejecting the B-Report at the first instance has recorded the sworn statement and registered the case, which is impermissible, in view of decision of the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of DR. RAVIKUMAR Vs. MRS. K.M.C. VASANTHA AND ANOTHER, ILR 2018 KAR 1725.

3. Learned HCGP appearing for the State would submit that the police after conducting the investigation rightly submitted the B-Report.

4. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.

5. Respondent No.1- complainant was the legally wedded wife of the son of the petitioner herein, and the son died leaving behind a death note alleging that respondent No.1 was responsible for his death and the charge sheet is laid against respondent No.1 for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC. It is only thereafter, respondent No.1 filed the private complaint on 22.07.2013 alleging that the petitioner-accused after the death of her husband continued to harass her over phone. The police after investigation submitted B-Report stating that there was no material available to substantiate the claim that petitioner-accused subjected respondent No.1 to cruelty. Hence, it is implied that the private complaint was filed by respondent No.1 only to wreck vengeance and with revengeful intent, since criminal prosecution was lodged against her for the offence under Section 306 IPC.

6. The learned Magistrate was required to pass an order rejecting the B-Report at the first instance and thereafter, record the sworn statement and register the case as held by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Dr. Ravi Kumar supra. In the instance case, learned Magistrate without passing an order rejecting the B-Report at the first instance has recorded the sworn statement and registered the case, which is impermissible.

Hence, the continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner-accused will be an abuse of process of law. Accordingly, I pass the following

ORDER

i. Criminal petition is allowed;

ii. The impugned proceedings in CC No.19300/2015 on the file of VII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, is hereby quashed.