SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
H.P.SANDESH
LALITA AND ANR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR – Respondent
CRL.P/201314/2018



1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

KALABURAGI BENCH

DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

CRIMINAL PETITION No.201314/2018

BETWEEN:

1.

LALITA

W/O SUBHASH NAWNEKAR

AGE: 55 YEARS

OCC: HOUSEHOLD

2.

SMITA W/O GIRISH

AGE: 35 YEARS

OCC: GOVT. SERVANT

BOTH R/O H.NO.244

VIDHYA NAGAR

KALABURAGI-585103

… PETITIONERS

(BY SRI SANJAY A. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

STATE OF KARNATAKA

THROUGH POLICE

WOMEN POLICE STATION

KALABURAGI

R

2

DIST. KALABURAGI-585102

REPRESENTED BY ADDL. SPP

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

KALABURAGI

2.

SHIVAMMA @ SHIVANI

W/O SAIPRASAD @ SACHIN

AGE: 38 YEARS

OCC: GOVT. SERVANT

R/O PLOT NO.18, SHANTI NAGAR

SAI LAYOUT, SHANTI NAGAR

KALABURAGI

DIST. KALABURAGI - 585103

… RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI SHARANABASAPPA M. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1;

SRI G.B.YADAV, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION

482 OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, PRAYING TO QUASH

THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 16.10.2018 PASSED BY III-

ADDITIONAL

DISTRICT

AND

SESSIONS

JUDGE,

KALABURAGI, IN CRL.R.P.NO.373/2017 ON ITS FILE AND

THEREBY PLEASED TO CONFIRM AND UPHOLD THE ORDER

DATED 02.12.2017 PASSED BY II-ADDITIONAL CIVIL

JUDGE AND JMFC, KALABURAGI, IN C.C.NO.2984/2012 ON

ITS FILE.

THIS

PETITION

HAVING

BEEN

HEARD

AND

RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 07.12.2021, COMING ON FOR

PRONOUNCEMENT, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE

FOLLOWING:

3

O R D E R

This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.,

praying this Court to quash the impugned order dated

16.10.2018 passed by III-Additional District and Sessions

Judge,

Kalaburagi,

in

Criminal

Revision

Petition

No.373/2017 and prayed this Court to confirm and uphold

the order dated 02.12.2017 passed by II-Additional Civil

Judge and JMFC, Kalaburagi, in C.C.No.2984/2012 and

pass such other orders or directions as deemed fit in the

facts and circumstances of the case.

2.

Factual

matrix

of

the

case

is

that

on

15.02.2012

the complainant/respondent No.2 lodged

complaint before respondent No.1/Police stating that she

was given in marriage to Saiprasad/accused No.1 on

13.05.2009 and at the time of marriage, cash of

Rs.2,00,000/- and eleven tholas of gold was given to

accused No.1. When respondent No.2 started to reside in

matrimonial home along with accused No.1, accused No.1

started harassing her and forcing her to give her salary to

4

him. As such, respondent No.2 being unable to tolerate the

harassment, left her matrimonial house. It is also alleged

in the complaint that since respondent No.2 was working

at Afzalpur, every day she used to travel in public bus from

Kalaburagi to Afzalpur. On 14.02.2012 at about 8.30 a.m.,

when respondent No.2 was at Central Bus Stand at

Kalaburagi, all the accused i.e., accused Nos.1 to 4 came

to the bus stand, assaulted her with hands, scolded her in

filthy language and told her to bring Rs.10,00,000/- as

dowry and threatened that they would take away her life if

she does not bring money. Hence, the case is registered

in Crime No.13/2012. The police have investigated the

matter and filed chargesheet and deleted the name of the

present petitioners. Thereafter, the trial was commenced

and the complainant was examined and she was also

partly cross-examined. Thereafter, the prosecution has

filed an application under Section 319 of Cr.P.C., and the

same was rejected. Being aggrieved by the rejection order

dated 02.12.2017, the complainant filed the revision

petition in Criminal Revision Petition No.373/2017 before

5

III-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi. The

revisional Court vide order dated 16.10.2018 allowed the

revision petition and consequently allowed the application

filed under Section 319 of Cr.P.C., and issued summons

against accused Nos.3 and 4. Hence, the present petition

is filed before this Court.

3.

The main contention of the learned counsel for

the petitioners is that the revisional Court h

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top