- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:9408 CRL.P No. 863 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 863 OF 2024 BETWEEN: 1. SMT CHIKKAMMA W/O LATE JAYARAMA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT NO 7, 7TH CROSS 6TH MAIN SRIRAMANAGAR ITTAMADU, BENGALURU - 560 085. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ROOPESHA B., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE BY NEW EXTENSION POLICE STATION THILAK PARK CIRCLE, TUMKUR - 572 101 REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. SMT LEELAVATHI W/O SHEKAR AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/AT NO 35, 2ND CROSS, CASHEYAR LAYOUT, B T M LAYOUT THAVARKERE BENGALURU CITY BENGALURU - 560 029. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. LAKSHMAN B, HCGP FOR R1; MS. RISHI N UMESH, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN SPL.C.NO.351/2015 WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE, Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:9408 CRL.P No. 863 of 2024 TUMAKURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S.497, 498-A, 504, 506, 324, 34 OF IPC AND U/S.3(1)(x) OF SC/ST (POA) 1989 FILED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 POLICE THAT IS NEW EXTENSION POLICE STATION, THILAK PARK CIRCLE, TUMAKURU IN CRIME NO.169/2014. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner, accused No.2, who is facing charges for offences punishable under Sections 497, 498A, 504, 506, and 324 read with Section 34 of the IPC, as well as under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, has approached this Court seeking relief. 2. The prosecution alleges that accused No.1, the husband of the de facto complainant, subjected her to cruelty, both mentally and physically, and also abused, assaulted, and threatened her with dire consequences, fully aware that she belongs to the Scheduled Caste community. The allegation against the petitioner, accused No.2, is that she is engaged in an illicit relationship with accused No.1, fully knowing that the de facto complainant is his legally wedded wife. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner, accused No.2, submits that, apart from the allegation of an illicit - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:9408 CRL.P No. 863 of 2024 relationship with accused No.1 during the subsistence of his marriage, there are no allegations that constitute the commission of offences under Sections 498A, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the IPC or under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST (POA) Act. He further submits that, as per Section 198 of the Cr.P.C., cognizance of an offence under Section 497 of the IPC can only be taken upon a written complaint. Therefore, he contends that the continuation of criminal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law. 4. In response, the learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that the charge sheet materials, along with witness statements, clearly establish that the petitioner subjected respondent No.2 (the de facto complainant) to cruelty and also assaulted, abused, and threatened her with reference to her caste. He argues that the veracity of these allegations should be examined during a full-fledged trial and not at this stage. He further contends that the present petition was filed only after the accused were remanded, and that eight witnesses have already been examined. Therefore, he asserts that the present petition is not maintainable. 5. The learned High Court Government Pleader reiterates the submissions made by the learned counsel for respondent No.2. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:9408 CRL.P No. 863 of 2024 6. The arguments presented by the learned counsel for both parties have been duly considered. 7. It is an undisputed fact that petitioner, accused No.2, is in a relationship with the husband of respondent No.2 (the de facto complainant). The only allegation against her is that she is involved in an illicit relationship with accused No.1. Therefore, the offence alleged against petitioner, accused No.2, does not fall within the ambit of Section 498A of the IPC. 8. Moreover, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence under Section 497 of the IPC, which, as per Section 198 of the Cr.P.C., can only be initiated upon a written complaint and not based on a report submitted by the police, which lacks the necessary authority. Additionally, the charge sheet does not contain any material to support the allegation that accused No.2 assaulted the de facto complainant or that she abused her with reference to her caste. In the absence of essential elements constituting these offences, the continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law. 9. Accordingly, the criminal petition is allowed. The impugned proceedings in Spl.C.No.351/2015, pending before the learned III Additional District & Sessions Judge, - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:9408 CRL.P No. 863 of 2024 Tumakuru, insofar as they relate to petitioner, accused No.2, are hereby quashed. 10. The learned Sessions Judge shall proceed against accused No.1 in accordance with the law, without being influenced by any observations made in this order. Any observations herein are solely for the purpose of deciding the present petition. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE HR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 100