ORDER

The petitioners – husband, father in-law and mother in-

law respectively are before this Court calling in question proceedings in S.C.No.8347/2023, pending before the XXXVII ACMM, Bengaluru, registered for the offences under Sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

2. Heard Sri Zameer Pasha, learned counsel for petitioners, Sri P. Thejesh, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri Mohammed Ishaluddin Z., learned counsel for respondent No.2.

3. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows:

The marriage between the first petitioner – accused No.1 and the complainant takes place on 21.01.2022. It transpires that the relationship between the two floundered. Immediately thereafter, it gave raise to several disputes between the two. One such dispute leads to registration of a complaint before the jurisdictional police, which becomes a crime in Crime No.244/2022, for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the D.P.Act. The police after investigation file a charge sheet, which is pending in C.C.No.8347/2023, for the aforesaid offences. Filing of the charge sheet is what has driven the petitioners to this Court in the subject petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that several allegations are made in the lengthy complaint and the allegations are made by the complainant against the father in- law, who is bedridden and not even in a position to walk and for which he has produced the photographs of the father in-law. Insofar as the mother in-law is concerned, it is his submission that there are only omnibus statements of torture and demand of dowry. Insofar as the husband is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioners would admit that there are allegations of assault. In this circumstance, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the proceedings against accused Nos.2 and 3 - father in-law and mother in-law in the least be quashed.

5. Per contra, Learned counsel for respondent No.2 –

complainant would vehemently refute the submissions by taking this Court to the complaint in its entirety, demonstrating every overt acts or non-overt acts of these petitioners in story twined in the complaint. Father in-law is hale and healthy and is in a position to go everywhere and is being torturing the daughter in-law, the complainant. Insofar as the mother in-law and husband are concerned, they have meted out such torture that would become the ingredients of the offence under Section

498A of the IPC.

6. Learned High Court Government Pleader toe the lines of the learned counsel for respondent No.2 and would refute the submissions of the learned counsel for petitioners contending that in the summary of the charge sheet, statements are there against all the three petitioners, but they are omnibus.

7. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material on record.

8. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute and requires no reiteration. The marriage that takes place on 21.01.2022, soon results in registration of the crime on 17.08.2022, for the aforesaid offences. The reasons are several skirmishes between the couple. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks to project that it was a love marriage and dowry cannot be demanded but the complainant seeks to project it was a arranged marriage and therefore, would lie within the realm of the concerned Court as it becomes a disputed questions of fact. What has driven the petitioners is filing of the charge sheet. The complaint runs into 18 pages. For 7 months of life with the husband and the in-laws, 18 pages of complaint is narrated with regard to the every days’ happening between the husband and wife on such kind of skirmish. The summary of the charge sheet after investigation based upon the complaint, would read as follows:

“17. (cid:6)ೇ(cid:9)ನಸಂ(cid:13)ಪ(cid:15)(cid:16