1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA

CRIMINAL PETITION No.7442/2017

BETWEEN

N. SURESH

S/O. T. NATARAJAN

AGED 33 YEARS

PLOT NO.51, SANTHOSH BAI STREET

SHRI PARASNATH NAGAR

THUNDALAM

CHENNAI - 600 077

... PETITIONER

[BY SMT. NEERAJA KARANTH, ADVOCATE

(PHYSICAL HEARING)]

AND

1.

R. AHALYA

D/O. P. RAJENDRAN

AGED 28 YEARS

R/AT. D BLOCK, FOURTH FLOOR

FEATHERLITE VAIKUNTAM APARTMENT

NO.6, GST ROAD, NANDIVARAM VILLAGE

GUDUVANCHERI

CHENNAI - 603 202

PRESENTLY RESIDING AT

NO.511, MERIDIYEN APARTMENTS

YENEPOYA UNIVERSITY

DERALAKATTE

MANGALURU - 573 020

D.K. DISTRICT

2

2.

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE

ULLALA POLICE STATION

D.K.DISTRICT - 560 001

REPRESENTED BY:

THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

HIGH COURT BUILDING

BENGALURU - 560 001

... RESPONDENTS

[BY SRI. K.S. ABHIJITH, HCGP FOR R2

(PHYSICAL HEARING)

R1 - SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)]

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION

482

OF

CR.P.C.,

PRAYING

TO

QUASH

THE

FIR

NO.275/2017 REGISTERED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 FOR

THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 66(C)

AND 72 OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT (ON THE

FILE

OF

THE

J.M.F.C.-III

COURT,

MANGALURU),

PURSUANT TO THE POLICE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 1^ST

RESPONDENT.

THIS

CRIMINAL

PETITION

COMING

ON

FOR

ADMISSION

THIS

DAY,

THE

COURT

MADE

THE

FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court calling in

question

the

proceedings

in

Crime

No.275/2017

pending before the JMFC (III Court), Mangaluru alleging

offences punishable under Sections 66C and 72 of the

3

Information Technology Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred

to as 'the said Act' for short).

2.

Heard

Smt.

Neeraja

Karanth,

learned

counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri. K.S. Abhijith,

learned HCGP for respondent No.2 and have perused

the material on record.

3.

Brief facts leading to the filing of the present

petition, as borne out from the pleadings, are as follows:

The petitioner and respondent No.1 - complainant

were husband and wife. Both of them get married on

31.08.2014 and out of several differences that arose

between the couple, several proceedings are instituted

by both of them. The petitioner has instituted

proceedings

for

annulment

of

marriage

in

HMOP No.336/2016. On receipt of notice from the

hands of the Court before whom the proceedings and for

dissolution of marriage is pending, the first respondent

files a Domestic Violence case under Section 12 of

4

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005

in Crl.M.C.No.201/2016 before the competent Court at

Mangaluru

seeking

payment

of

maintenance

of

Rs.60,000/-

per

month.

The

ground

on

which

maintenance was sought by respondent No.1 before the

Court at Mangaluru was that she was a housewife and

not employed. The petitioner in order to defend himself,

draws up the salary slip of respondent No.1 -

complainant and produces it before the Court at

Mangaluru, where the Domestic Violence proceedings

were pending adjudication in which maintenance

amount of Rs.60,000/- per month was prayed by the

complainant.

4.

The salary slip was drawn from the e-filing

portal, where all the family members of the petitioner

and the first respondent were filing their Income Tax

Returns, which was a portal that was accessible to the

family. The petitioner accessed to the same and

5

produced the salary slip of respondent No.1 working at

Accenture and also filing Income Tax Returns to that

effect. It is after the said document was produced

before the Court at Mangaluru, respondent No.1

registers the subject complaint against the petitioner

invoking Sections 66C and 72 of the said Act.

Section 66C and 72 of the said Act reads as

follows:

"66C. Punishment for identity theft.

Whoever, fraudulently or dishonestly make

use of the electronic signa