Reserved on : 27.11.2025 Pronounced on : 08.01.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 08^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION No.7053 OF 2024 BETWEEN:

1 . ABUZAR AHMED S/O SAUD AHMED, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS.

2 . SAUD AHMED S/O MUKTAR AHMED, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS.

3 . MARZIA SAUD W/O SAUD AHMED, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.

4 . FAIZAN AHMED S/O SAUD AHMED, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS.

ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO. 27, ALFRED STREET, MUSEUM ROAD, RICHMOND TOWN, BENGALURU – 560 025.

... PETITIONERS (BY SRI SYED KHALEEL PASHA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY BASAVANGUDI WOMEN PS BENGALURU CITY, STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560 001.

2 . RUMAN ASAD W/O ABUZAR AHMED, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/AT NO. 5A, 4^TH FLOOR, 27^TH MAIN, 39^TH CROSS, AL AMEEN APARTMENT, 9^TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR BENGALURU – 560 069.

3. BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION BENGALURU.

... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI B.N.JAGADEESHA, ADDL.SPP FOR R-1;

SRI NAVEED AHMED, ADVOCATE FOR R-2; SRI H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN, DSGI FOR R-3)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.90/2024 OF BASAVANGUDI WOMEN P.S., P/U/S 498-A, 504 OF IPC, R/W 3 AND 4 OF DP ACT, WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE

37^th ACMM COURT AT BANGALORE.

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 27.11.2025, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

CAV ORDER

The petitioners, 4 in number, stand before this Court seeking shelter from the sweeping arm of criminal law, which according to them, has been set in motion, not by the weight of culpability, but by the frailty of matrimonial discord. They call into question the registration of crime in Crime No.90 of 2024, where they have been arrayed as accused, for offences punishable under Sections 498A and 504 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ for short).

2. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows: -

Before embarking upon consideration of the issue on its merits, it becomes necessary to delineate the relationships that bind and now divide, the protagonists in the lis. The 2^nd respondent is the complainant/wife of the 1^st petitioner/accused No.1. Accused No.2 is the father-in-law of the complainant; accused No.3 is the mother-in-law and accused No.4 is the brother-in-law. The 2^nd respondent/complainant and accused No.1 get married on 25-08-2017. The couple then relocated to the United States of America, where accused No.1 was gainfully employed. For nearly 6 years, the matrimonial life unfolded overseas, culminating in the birth of a child. It is only in January 2023 that the complainant returns to India and thereafter, seeks to set the criminal law into motion, by registering a complaint for offences punishable under Sections 498A, 504 r/w 34 of the IPC, not only against her husband but also against the father-in-law, mother-in-law and brother-in- law. On the complaint, the Police register a crime in Crime No.90 of 2024 for the afore-quoted offences, including offences under Sections 3 and 4 of the Act. On registration of crime, the petitioners are before this Court in the subject petition.

3. Heard Sri Syed Khaleel Pasha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners; Sri B.N. Jagadeesha, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1, Sri Naveed Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 and Sri H. Shanthi Bhushan, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for respondent No.3.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would vehemently contend that accused No.1 and the complainant lived in United States of America. They had some misunderstanding or minor problems that would happen in a marriage. The complainant comes back to India in January 2023 and then alleges that the husband and other members of the family have harassed her over telephone. He would submit th