Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 38912
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR, J
VASU S/O, LATE N.P. RAMAIAH – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11827 OF 2025 | S.C.NO.114/2024 | CR.NO.18/2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI. PRATHEEP.K.C.
For the Respondents: SRI. M. R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1; R2 IS SERVED & UNREPRESENTED
The court clarified that non-family members, such as a girlfriend, cannot be prosecuted under IPC provisions for dowry harassment, emphasizing strict interpretation of 'relative' in relation to dowry deaths.
Headnote:(A) IPC - Sections 498A, 304B, 504, 323, 109 - Dowry Prohibition Act - Sections 3, 4, and 6 - Petitioners sought to quash criminal proceedings against them in relation to the alleged dowry death of Smt. Surabhi, arguing lack of evidence connecting them to the offences. Court found that petitioners, being the in-laws and not directly involved in the alleged harassment for dowry, could not be deemed responsible under the relevant sections. (Paras 3-6)
(B) Legal Principle - Definition of 'relative' in IPC - Court held that a girlfriend or person in a romantic relationship is not a 'relative' as understood under IPC sections concerning dowry deaths and domestic harassment. The accused must be shown to have committed overt acts of cruelty. (Paras 9-12)
Facts of the case:
The case concerned the alleged suicide of Smt. Surabhi, who was married to accused No.1. Petitioners are her in-laws and were charged alongside other accused. The complaint was filed in response to her death.
Findings of Court:
The Court noted that there was no evidence of the petitioners' involvement in causing harm to Smt. Surabhi, leading to the conclusion that their prosecution would be an abuse of process.
Issues: Whether the petitioners could be held liable for the alleged offences given their familial relationship?
Ratio Decidendi: The Court determined that the term 'relative' in the context of Section 498A of IPC does not include non-family members like a girlfriend, and unsupported allegations do not justify prosecution.
Result: Petition allowed; proceedings against the petitioners quashed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. description of parties and jurisdiction. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. details of the criminal charges and proceedings. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. discussion on prior legal precedents relevant to the case. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. interpretation of the term 'relative' under section 498a ipc. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. conclusion and result of the proceedings. (Para 14) |
ORAL ORDER
In this petition, petitioners have sought for the following reliefs:-
"Wherefore the petitioners most humbly pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash the entire proceedings in S.C.No.114/2024 (Cr.No.18/2024) by Shravanabelagola Police, pending on the file of IV Addl. District & Sessions Judge at Hassan, sitting at Channarayapatna for the offence under section 498A, 304-B, 504, 323 & 109 of IPC R/W section 3, 4 & 6 of DP Act in so far as petitioners are concerned in the interest of justice and equity."
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned HCGP for the 1st respondent and perused the material on record. Though the notice of this petition has been served on the 2nd respondent, he has chosen to remain absent and unrepresented.
3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the 2nd respondent - complainant is the father of the deceased Smt.Surabhi, who said to have expired on 22.02.2024 by committing suicide. It is a matter of record that the aforesaid Smt.Surabhi was married to one Darshan - accused No.1 and the petitioners herein are his parents. Accused No.4 is one Smt.Sushma, who is alleged to be the girl friend of accused No.1. The 2nd respondent - complainant having filed the complaint dated 22.02.2024, an FIR came to be registered in Crime No.18/2024 by the 1st respondent - Police against accused Nos. 1 to 4 for alleged offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 504, 323, 109 r/w Section 34 of IPC and under Sections 3 , 4 and 6 of the D.P.Act .
4. In pursuance of the aforesaid complaint and FIR, the police authorities conducted investigation and filed charge sheet, which is pending in S.C.No.114/2024 before the Sessions Court. Subsequently, accused No.4 - Smt.Sushma approached this Court in Crl.P.No.683/2025 which was allowed by this Court vide order dated 18.06.2025,, quashing the proceedings qua accused No.4 as hereunder:-
In this petition, the petitioner has sought for the following relief:
"WHEREFORE the petitioner most humbly prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash the entire proceedings qua the petitioner in S.C.NO.114/2024 in crime No.18/2024 by Shravanabelagola police, pending on the file of IV addl district & Sessions judge at Hassan, sitting at Channarayapatna for the offence under section 498A, 304B, 504, 323 & 109 of IPC R/w section 3, 4 & 6 of DP act in the interest of justice and equity."
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned HCGP for respondent No.1 and learned counsel for respondent No.2 and perused the material on record.
3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that respondent No.2/defacto-complainant is the father of one Surabhi, who is said to have expired on 22.02.2024. It is an undisputed fact and material on record that respondent No.2 was the father of the deceased Surabhi whose husband was one Darshan and Vasu and Sujatha were her father-in-law and mother-in-law respectively. On 22.02.2024, respondent No.2, father of the deceased Surabhi filed the instant complaint which is registered in FIR in crime No.18/2024 against the petitioner/accused No.1, Darshan, husband of the deceased Surabhi and Vasu and Sujatha, father and mother of Darshan as accused Nos.1 to 3 respectively for offences punishable under Sections 498A , 304B, 504 and 34 IPC read with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. After investigation, the police authorities filed a chargesheet for offences punishable under , 304B, 504 and 34 read with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 along with Section 109 which is currently pending in the impugned S.C.No.114/20
