IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.102084/2019
C/W.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.102085/2019
IN CRL.P.NO.102084/2019
BETWEEN:
IMMAMHUSAIN S/O. BABUSAB HANABRATTI
AGED ABOUT: 46 YEARS,
OCC: PRIMARY SCHOOL TEACHER,
R/O: NEGINHAL TQ: BAILHONGAL,
NOW WORKING KHPS, GODHOLI,
TQ: KHANAPUR, DIST.: BELAGAVI
...PETITIONER.
(BY SHRI VIJAY S CHINIWAR, ADVOCATE.)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH GOKAK P.S.
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENCH AT: DHARWAD
2.
SMT. DILSHAD @ DILSHADBEGAM
D/O ALLASAB DALAWARNAIK
AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: GOVT. TEACHER,
R/O: MOKASHI GALLI, GOKAK
2
NOW AT R/O: BANAHATTI,
R/O. JAMKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOTE.
…RESPONDENTS.
(BY SHRI PRAVEEN K. UPPAR, HCGP FOR R.1;
R.2 – NOTICE SERVED.)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF
THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973, SEEKING TO QUASH THE
ENTIRE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.1919/2014 REGISTERED
FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 498A, 323, 504,
506 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860, PENDING ON THE FILE OF
THE PRL. JMFC COURT, GOKAK, VIDE ANNEXURE-A, CONSEQUENTLY
BY QUASHING THE COMPLAINT, FIR AND CHARGE, AT VIDE
ANNEXURE-B, B1 AND B2 RESPECTIVELY, ETC.,.
IN CRL.P.NO.102085/2019
BETWEEN:
IMAMHUSAIN S/O BABUSAB HANABRATTI
AGED ABOUT: 48 YEARS,
OCC: PRIMARY SCHOOL TEACHER,
R/O: NEGINHAL, TQ: BAILHONGAL,
NOW WORKING KHPS, GODHOLI,
TQ: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELAGAVI
…PETITIONER.
(BY SHRI VIJAY S CHINIWAR, ADVOCATE.)
AND:
1.
SMT. DILSHADBEGAUM
D/O ALLASAB DALAWARNAIK
AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: GOVT. PRIMARY
SCHOOL TEACHER,
R/O: BANAHATTI, TQ: JAMAKHANDI,
DIST: BAGALKOTE.
3
2.
MOHAMMADSADIQ
S/O IMAMHUSSAID HANABRATTI
AGE: 14 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O: BANAHATTI,
TQ. JAMKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOTE.
3.
KUMARI ALPHIA
D/O IMAMHUSSAIN HANABRATTI
AGE: 12 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O: BANAHATTI, TQ: JAMAKHANDI,
DIST: BAGALKOTE.
4.
KUMARI TANGILA
D/O IMAMHUSSAIN HANABRATTI
AGE: 11 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O: BANAHATTI, TQ: JAMAKHANDI,
DIST: BAGALKOTE.
RESPONDENTS NO.2 TO 4 ARE MINOR,
AND THEY REPRESENTED BY
NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER/
RESPONDENT NO.1
…RESPONDENTS.
(R.1 – NOTICE SERVED;
R.2 TO R.4 – MINOR, REP. BY R.1.)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF
THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973, SEEKING TO QUASH THE
ENTIRE
PROCEEDINGS
FILED
BY
THE
RESPONDENTS
UNDER
SECTION
12
OF
THE
DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE
ACT,
IN
CRL.MISC.NO.59/2017 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE &
JMFC COURT, BANAHATTI, VIDE ANNEXURE-A, ETC.,.
THESE PETITIONS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR
ORDERS ON 11.1.2022, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF
ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
4
The Criminal Petition No.102084 of 2019 is filed seeking
quashing of proceedings in C.C.No.1919 of 2014 registered for
the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506
of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, pending before the Principal
JMFC Court, Gokak. Criminal Petition No.102085 of 2019 is filed
seeking quashing of proceedings registered under Section 12 of
the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (‘the Act’ for short) in Criminal
Miscellaneous No.59 of 2017 pending before the Civil Judge and
JMFC, Banahalli.
Both these petitions are clubbed together and taken
up for disposal in the light of the fact that the parties to the lis
in both these cases are same and the facts giving rise to the
impugned proceedings are also same. In this order the parties
will be referred to as obtaining in Criminal Petition No.102084 of
2019.
In Criminal Petition No.102084 of 2019 petitioner is
the husband of the 2nd respondent/complainant. Marriage
between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent took place on
5
18.3.2001 and from out of the wedlock it appears that the
couple has three children. The relationship between the
petitioner and the 2nd respondent did not go well and ended in
divorce on 20.1.2007 in accordance with the customs of parties.
After divorce between the petitioner and the 2nd
respondent, the 2nd respondent files a complaint before the
jurisdictional police at Gokak Town against the petitioner and his
mother alleging offences punishable under Sections 323, 504,
498A and 506 of the IPC. The proceedings after filing of the
charge sheet were in C.C.No.1639 of 2017. After a full-fledged
trial, the petitioner and his mother were acquitted of the
offences by an order dated 8.7.2013. This order of acquittal
became final.
5.
During the same time when the 2nd respondent had
registered a complaint before the jurisdictional police at Gokak,
she had also registered a complaint on 16.5.2007 in Marihal
Police Station against the petitioner, his mother and brother
alleging offences punishable under Sections 498A, 506 read with
Section 34 of the IPC. Cognizance was taken in this proceeding
as well in C.C.No.1889 of 2007 and after a full-fledged trial, the
6
petitioner and other family members of the petitioner were
acquitted of the offences. This acquittal also became final.
6.
A third complaint had been registered by the 2nd
respondent/wife at a different police station on 12.9.2007 for
the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 506 and 307 of
the IPC. Since the offence under Section 307 was made, it
became a Sessions Case in S.C.No.32 of 2008. This also ended
in acquittal of the petitioner for the alleged offence. Therefore,
three proceedings were instituted by the 2nd respondent/wife
and all three were after divorce. In those proceedings the
petitioner and his family members were acquitted of whatever
offences that were alleged in all three proceedings and all the
three acquittals have become final. After the aforesaid acquittals
attaining finality, the 2nd respondent again files a complaint
before the Police at Gokok Police Station in Crime No.396 of
2013 for offences punishable under Section 498A, 323, 504 and
506 of the IPC in which cognizance is taken and proceedings are
pending in C.C.No.1919 of 2014 before the learned Magistrate
at Gokok. It is this proceeding that is called in question in the
subject Criminal Petition.
7
7.
Criminal Petition No.102085 of 2019 also arise out
of the very marriage between the petitioner and the 2nd
respondent. This time the proceedings are initiated invoking the
provisions of the Act in Criminal Miscellaneous No.59 of 2017 for
the offence punishable under Section 12 of the Act. Other facts
that are narrated in the connected criminal petition being
identical are not reiterated. The proceedings under the Act are
called in question on the ground that there cannot be invocation
of Act in the year 2017 ten years after the divorce between the
petitioner and the 2nd respondent.
8.
Heard the learned cou
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.