- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1604 CRL.P No. 200968 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200968 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: VIJAY LAXMI W/O PRAKASH METRE, AGE ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC: CONSTABLE TRAFFIC P S BIDAR, R/O. NAVADAGERI, TQ. AND DIST. BIDAR-585411. …PETITIONER (BY SRI PREETAM DEULGAONKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH, NEW TOWN POLICE STATION, BIDAR, REPRESENTED BY ADDL. SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH. 2. SHAKUNTALA W/O BASAVARAJ METRE, AGE ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O. CHANDRAMPALLI VILLAGE, NOW AT NAVADAGERI, TQ. AND DIST. BIDAR-585411. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI GOPAL KRISHNA YADAV, HCGP FOR R1 SRI R.S. LAGALI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ALLOWED AND QUASH THE FIR AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN CRIME NO. 116/2024 REGISTERED IN THE NEW TOWN POLICE STATION, BIDAR, PENDING BEFORE II ND ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, BIDAR, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S. 323, 324, 355, 504 OF IPC 1860. Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1604 CRL.P No. 200968 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner is being aggrieved by the filing of FIR in Cr.No.116/2024 of the respondent police pending on the file of the learned II Addl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Bidar for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 355 and 504 of IPC and seeks to quash the same. Factual Matrix of the case: 2. It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner is the daughter-in-law of respondent No.2. Her daughter-in-law was working as a constable. Twelve days prior to lodging of the complaint, husband of the complainant had sustained injuries in the accident. Consequently, they had to stay in the house of her son viz., Prakash at Navadageri. From the date of staying in the house of her son, her daughter-in-law used to quarrel with her. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1604 CRL.P No. 200968 of 2024 3. On 25.05.2024, at around 7.00 am, the petitioner is stated to have assaulted the complainant with slipper and threatened her that she should go out of the house. Further, it is submitted that in addition to assault from the slipper, she was also beaten on her back and face. Consequently, she sustained injuries. However, she did not lodge a complaint soon after the incident. Again around 9.00 pm, the petitioner after coming from the duty, again took quarrel with the complainant and assaulted her with the wooden stick and caused injuries. Therefore, a complaint came to be registered against the petitioner. The jurisdictional police have registered a case in Cr.No.116/2024 and the matter is pending for consideration. 4. Heard Sri.Preetam Deulgaonkar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. Gopal Krishna Yadav, learned HCGP for respondent No.1-State and Sri.R.S.Lagali, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 5. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the averments of the complaint prima-facie would - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1604 CRL.P No. 200968 of 2024 not disclose or attract the ingredients of the provisions mentioned in the FIR. 6. It is further submitted that a false case has been registered against the petitioner in order to avoid further complications such as, there is likelihood of lodging the complaint by the petitioner against her husband and in-laws. 7. It is further submitted that the petitioner herein had lodged a complaint against respondent No.2 which is registered in Cr.No.46/2024 and the same is also pending for consideration. Such being the case, even assuming that, the petitioner is directed to face the trial, the purpose would not be served. Therefore, the petition is required to be allowed and the FIR may be quashed. Making such submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition. 8. Per contra, Sri. Lagali R.S., learned counsel for respondent No.2 submitted that there are serious allegations made against the petitioner. The petitioner being a police constable had assaulted respondent No.2 - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1604 CRL.P No. 200968 of 2024 with slipper and also with the hands and caused injuries. There are two eyewitnesses to the incident. In the meantime, the petitioner by using her good office and managed to file a case against respondent No.2. 9. It is further submitted that when there is a prima-facie case made out against the petitioner, it is not appropriate to quash the proceedings at the initial stage. Making such submissions, the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 prays to dismiss the petition. 10. Similarly, the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State adopted the arguments addressed by the learned counsel for respondent No.2 and he further submitted that the averments of the complaint would disclose that respondent No.2 had made out a case to proceed further for the purpose of conducting investigation. Therefore, he prays to dismiss the petition. 11. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the averments of the complaint, it appears from the record that the petitioner is stated to - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1604 CRL.P No. 200968 of 2024 have assaulted her mother-in-law as narrated in the complaint. There are two eyewitnesses to the incident. It is needless to say that respondent No.2 lodged a complaint before the respondent police on 27.05.2024 whereas, it is stated that the petitioner had also lodged a complaint against respondent No.2, however, the same has not been produced to substantiate her case. 12. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that this is not a fit case to quash the proceedings. Consequently, the petition is deserved to be dismissed. Ordered, accordingly. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE RSP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33 CT:PK