Back
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
R RAGHU – Appellant
Versus
SMT. PUSHPALATHA M H – Respondent
CRL.RP/601/2018
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST 2018
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.601 OF 2018
C/W
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.603 OF 2018
In Crl.RP. No.601/2018
BETWEEN
R.Raghu
S/o. Ramappa,
Aged about 39 years,
Agriculturist,
Resident of Annegere,
Panchanahalli Hobli,
Kaduru Taluk,
Chikkamagaluru District-573132.
…Petitioner
(By Sri. A.V.Gangadharappa, Advocate)
AND
Smt. Pushpalatha M.H.
W/o. R.Raghu,
D/o. Honnappa,
Aged about 36 years,
Residing at Malleshwara,
Kadur Post, Kadur Taluk,
Chikkamagalur District-577548.
…Respondent
(By Sri. Vigneshwar S. Shastri, Advocate)
2
This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section
397 read with Section 401 of Criminal Procedure Code
praying to set aside the judgment and order dated
23.01.2018 passed by the Court of II Additional Sessions
Judge, at Chikkamagaluru, in Crl.A.No.126/2017 and the
judgment and order dated 30.07.2016 passed by the
Principal
Civil
Judge
and
JMFC
at
Kadur,
in
Crl.Misc.No.64/2014
and
be
pleased
to
dismiss
Crl.Misc.No.64/2014.
In Crl.RP. No.603/2018
BETWEEN
R.Raghu
S/o. Ramappa,
Aged about 39 years,
Agriculturist,
Resident of Annegere,
Panchanahalli Hobli,
Kaduru Taluk,
Chikkamagaluru District-573132.
…Petitioner
(By Sri. A.V.Gangadharappa, Advocate)
AND
1.
Smt. Pushpalatha M.H.
W/o. R.Raghu,
D/o. Honnappa,
Aged about 36 years,
3
2.
Master Srujan R.
S/o. R.Raghu,
Aged about 10 years,
Minor, represented by
Mother and natural guardian,
Smt.Pushpalatha M.H.
W/o. R.Raghu,
D/o. Honnappa,
Aged about 36 years,
Both are residing at Malleshwara,
Kadur Post, Kadur Taluk,
Chikkamagalur District-577548.
…Respondents
(By Sri. Vigneshwar S. Shastri, Advocate)
This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section
397 read with Section 401 of Criminal Procedure Code
praying to set aside the judgment and order dated
23.01.2018 passed by the Court of II Additional Sessions
Judge, at Chikkamagaluru, in Crl.A.No.145/2016 and the
judgment and order dated 30.07.2016 passed by the court
of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC at Kadur, in
Crl.Misc.No.64/2014
and
be
pleased
to
dismiss
Crl.Misc.No.64/2014.
These Criminal Revision Petitions coming on for
admission this day, the court made the following:
4
ORDER
These two petitions are disposed of by this common
order. Heard the petitioner’s counsel and the respondents’
counsel.
2. Upon a report made by CDPO, Kadur, regarding
domestic violence, proceeding under sections 18, 19, 20,
21 and 22 was initiated in the Court of Magistrate, Kadur.
There is no dispute that the petitioner married Pushpalatha
and a son was born in the said wedlock. The allegations
leveled against the petitioner are that at the time of
marriage, dowry was given to the petitioner that after the
marriage, the wife lived with the petitioner for about six
months and thereafter the petitioner started demanding
more dowry. In this regard she was subjected to mental
and physical cruelty. The petitioner also suspected her
conduct and neglected to provide anything for her and her
child. There are also allegations that the petitioner did not
provide food and clothing to the petitioner and her son and
drove them out of the house.
5
3. The petitioner being the respondent before the
Magistrate appeared and filed statement of objections
admitting the marriage, but, he contended that his wife
used to go to her parents house very often and was
staying there for months together without intimation to
him. She was unwilling to come to his house and
whenever she was asked to come she used to quarrel with
them. She also did not adjust with his parents. He denied
any domestic violence having taken place.
4. The Magistrate held enquiry. The wife he
