The court held that prima facie evidence of harassment warranted continuation of criminal proceedings against the accused.

AND:

Digitally signed by 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REKHA R BY VIJAYANAGAR P.S (MYSURU)

Location:

High Court BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR of Karnataka HIGH COURT BUILDINGS BANGALORE-560 001

2. MARISWAMY NAYAK S/O DODDANAYAK AGED 59 YEARS SBI BANK MANAGE, D.NO.3295-21/A

2^ND STAGE, VIJAYANAGARA MYSURU-570 011 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.VENKAT SATYANARAYAN.A, HCGP FOR R1;

SRI.B.S.NAGARAJA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY 1^st RESPONDENT PURSUANT TO WRITTEN COMPLAINT OF 2^nd RESPONDENT IN C.C.NO.482/2017 (ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.10/2017) OF VIJAYANAGAR P.S., (MYSURU) FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES U/S 498A,306 R/W 34 OF IPC , PENDING ON THE FILE OF IV JMFC COURT AT MYSURU.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MS JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI

ORAL ORDER

Petitioner who is a arraigned as accused No.2 has filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C , with a prayer to quash the criminal proceedings pending against her in C.C.No.482/2017 for the offences punishable under sections 498-A and 306 r/w Section 34 of I.P.C.

2. In support of the petition, the petitioner has contended that the plain reading of averments of the complaint would create an impression that the petitioner has committed the offences. However, on a careful reading and surveying the incriminating material, the innocence of the petitioner could be noticed. The alleged incident took place in the house of the deceased. She had deserted the company of her husband and staying at her parents house over a period of one year. As such question of harassing the deceased, either mentally or physically does not arise. The complaint is well designed by the first informant to implicate the petitioner falsely. The complaint indicate that the first informant had set up a separate residence for the deceased and her husband. Despite the same, she had deserted her husband and opted to stay with her parents. Such being the case mere advising the couple to live happily by mending their behaviour does not amount to harassment or abetment. The first informant who is working as a Manager in a bank, instead of advising the deceased was unnecessarily supporting her. The deceased has not left any death note. The statement of witnesses indicate that on trivial matters there used to be quarrel between the couple which cannot be termed as abetment to commit suicide. The investigating officer has dropped accused Nos.3, 4 and 6. The position of petitioner is also standing on the same footing.

3. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for petitioner has relied upon by the following decisions:

(i) Mahendra Awase Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh (Mahendra Awase), Crl.A.No.221/2025 (SLP(Crl.)No.11868/2023.

(ii) Jayedeepsinh Pravinsinh Chavda and Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat (Jayedeepsinh), 2024 INSC 960 .

4. Opposing the petition, learned HCGP submitted that after conducting detailed investigation, charge sheet is filed against accused Nos.1 and 2, who are the husband and mother-in-law of deceased. The deceased was in the habit of writing diary, wherein she has clearly noted the harassment meted out by the petitioner. Ultimately, she was forced to leave the matrimonial home. After the delivery and birth of the daughter also, she was not taken back. As a cumulative effect of the harassment, the deceased choose to end her life. In respect of the harassment there were previous complaints to the police and the matter was conciliated. There is prime facie material to proceed against the petitioner along with accused No.1. It is not the case for quashing the criminal proceedings against the petitioner and pray to reject the same.

5. Heard arguments and perused the record.

6. The marriage of accused No.1 and deceased wa