Insufficient grounds for charges under the Atrocities Act were identified, as the allegations did not satisfy requisite legal conditions.

ORAL ORDER

Petitioners/accused Nos.2, 3 and 4 in Special Case No.209/2023 are at the doors of this Court calling in question the entire proceedings.

2. Heard the learned counsel Sri. K.B.K. Swamy appearing for the petitioners and the learned HCGP Sri. Vinay Mahadevaiah appearing for the respondent No.1. The second respondent/complainant though served on 29.02.2024 has remained unrepresented even today. Therefore, the petitioner and the learned HCGP appearing for the state are heard in the matter.

3. Facts in brief germane are as follows:

3.1. Accused No.1 and the complainant get married.The marriage takes place on 31.08.2020. The relationship between accused No.1 and the complainant is said to have floundered. On the floundering of the relationship several proceedings are instituted against each other. The impugned proceedings come about on a complaint being registered by second respondent - wife on 16.06.2023. The said complaint becomes a crime in Crime No.62/2023 for the offences punishable under Section 498A , 324, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the IPC ; Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and Sections 3 (1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities)Amendment Act, 2015 (‘Atrocities Act’ for short).

3.2. The police after investigation have file a charge sheet against these petitioners for the afore-quoted offences. Filing of the charge sheet has driven these petitioners to this Court in the subject petition.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the allegation of the provisions of the Atrocities Act would not get attracted qua the first petitioner, as the first petitioner also belongs to the Scheduled Caste. Insofar as the second and third petitioners are concerned, the allegation of hurling of abuses has taken place one year prior to the registration of the complaint. Therefore, the said allegation also would not hold any water in the light of several judgments of the Apex Court. Insofar as the offence under Section 498A is concerned, the petitioners being the maternal aunt and uncle of the complainant cannot be dragged into the web of crime for offences punishable under of the IPC . Therefore, the learned counsel would submit that the proceedings may be quashed against these petitioners as the husband/accused No.1 is facing trial.

5. Per contra, the learned HCGP appearing for the respondent No.1 - state would seek to submit that the allegations are found against these petitioners insofar as the offences under Section 498A of the IPC or the Atrocities Act are concerned. In that light, the charge sheet having been filed it is for the petitioners to come out clean in a full blown trial. On this score, the learned HCGP would just seek dismissal of the petition.

6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsels for the respective parties and have perused the material available on record.

7. The afore-narrated facts are a matter of record.The relationship between the petitioners and the complainant is explained herein above. The wife registers a complaint against the husband and several members of the family on 16.06.2023. Since the entire issue has now triggered from the complaint, I deem it appropriate to notice the complaint. The complaint reads as follows:

11. Insofar as the present petitioners are concerned, even in the complaint, nothing is found, insofar as the offence under Section 498A of the IPC is concerned, the ingredients for the said offence are completely absent. Insofar as the provisions of the Atrocities Act are concerned, as observed herein above and the admitted facts in the lis, the first petitioner also belongs to a Scheduled Caste and therefore, the offence under the Atrocities Act ca