Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 13617
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
J.M.KHAZI, J
PRAVEEN KUMAR J – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11033 OF 2023
For the Appellants/Petitioners: KENCHAPPA
For the Respondents: VENKAT SATYANARAYAN.A, PONNANNA.M.B
Factual disputes between parties cannot be resolved through quashing petitions; a full trial is necessary.
Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Dowry Prohibition Act - Sections 3, 4 - Petition to quash proceedings against accused under various IPC sections for harassment and dowry allegations - Allegations found to be disputed, necessitating a full trial - Court held that factual determinations require evidence not suitable for summary proceedings. (Paras 3-10)
(B) Burden of proof - The necessity to substantiate claims made in support of quashing petitions - The accused claimed the charges were fabricated while the respondent maintained allegations of harassment were valid. (Paras 3-10)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners were accused of multiple IPC sections related to harassment and dowry demands following their marriage and the subsequent filing of reciprocal complaints by both parties regarding allegations of violence and harassment.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the disputed facts raised by both parties warranted a full trial, dismissing the petition to quash.
Issues: Whether the allegations made were sufficient to warrant quashing of the charges without a trial.
Ratio Decidendi: The court articulated that factual disputes cannot be resolved in a quash petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C, necessitating trial proceedings.
Result: Petition rejected.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. filing of petition under section 482 cr.p.c. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. allegations of harassment and counter-complaints. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER Section 4 82 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS ON THE FILE OF THE 31st ACMM BENGALURU OF PEENYA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.1588/2023 (CR.NO.287/2022) FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER Section 4 98-A,313,323,504,506 READ WITH Section 3 4 OF IPC AND Section 3 ,4 OF DP ACT, ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI
ORAL ORDER
Petitioners who are arraigned as accused Nos.1 to 3 have filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C, with a prayer to quash the criminal proceeding initiated against them in C.C.No.1588/2023 on the file of 31st ACMM, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections
498A, 313, 323, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 IPC and Sections
3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act ('DP Act' for short).
2. For the sake of convenience, parties are referred to by their ranks before the trial Court.
3. In support of the petition, the accused have contended that they are innocent of the alleged offences. In the FIR, name of accused No.3 does not found place and later in the charge sheet included. The allegations made against the accused are totally false, frivolous, concocted and fabricated. After the marriage, complainant started living with accused Nos.1 and 2. She was in the habit of frequently picking up quarrel with them. At the time of marriage, there was no demand of any dowry. Even after the marriage, no such demand was made. Complainant was not interested in staying with accused No.2 and was demanding accused No.1 to register the said house in her name. When her demand was not accepted, she went to her matrimonial home and staying there.
3.1 Accused No.3, who is the married daughter of accused No.2, is living separately with her husband and children. She is not connected to the alleged crime. Unnecessarily she is being dragged into the case. In fact on 11.03.2022, accused No.1 issued legal notice to the complainant to return to the matrimonial home. On 30.03.2022, though returned to the matrimonial home, she once again went away on 13.04.2022. She has lodged a false complaint, on the basis of which case is registered. In fact, accused No.1 has lodged a complaint with the Commissioner of Police on 11.04.2022 and endorsement was issued on 24.05.2022. Accused No.1 has also filed M.C.No.2618/2022 for divorce after which the present false complaint is filed. In fact on 02.09.2022, complainant and her gang came to the house of accused Nos.1 and 2 and assaulted them. In this regard, Cr.No.297/2022 is registered and charge sheet in C.C.No.20027/2023 is filed. In the light of the same, the proceedings pending against the petitioners are non-cognizable and hence the petition.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel representing the complainant and learned High Court Government Pleader representing respondent No.1 State would submit that the marriage of complainant and accused No.1 was celebrated on 14.11.2021 at Bhadravathi. It was an arranged marriage. Within two days of the marriage, the accused person started harassing and ill treating her to get gold and cash. Though at the time of marriage, gold, silver articles weighing 150 gms were given and even though accused Nos.1 and 2 were having own house, they were demanding that if the said house is given on lease, they would get at least ₹3 lakhs.
5. Though on the intervention of her parents, they kept quiet for sometime, when she became pregnant, they forced her to abort the child by giving some medicine. On the advice of the doctors, she had to undergo abortion in the nursing home at Bhadravathi. Accused No.1 refused to come to Bhadravathi to give consent and on the other hand sent his consent signature scanned through the phone.
