- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:1949 CRL.P No. 4759 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4759 OF 2021 BETWEEN: 1. SRI SANTOSH KUMAR M., S/O R MARGA BANDHU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS 2. SRI MARGA BANDHU, S/O LATE RAJAGOPAL, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS 3. SMT. MAHESHWARI W/O R MARGA BANDHU AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS ALL ARE R/A NO.33/25 6TH CROSS, CHURCH STREET, BOMMANAHALLI, BENGALURU-560 068. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. VISHRUTH C., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE BY KARNATAKA, BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MADIVALA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU, REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. SMT. DIVYA, W/O SANTOSH, NO.549, 11TH CROSS HONGASANDRA, Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court Of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:1949 CRL.P No. 4759 of 2021 BEGUR ROAD, BENGALURU-560 068. …RESPONDENTS [BY SMT. K.P. YASHODHA, HCGP FOR R1; SRI SARAVANA G., ADVOCATE FOR R2 (ABSENT)] THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN FIR IN CR.NO.42/2021 OF MADIVALA P.S., REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A R/W 34 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3 & 4 OF D.P ACT REGISTERED AS C.C.NO.12274/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE III A.C.M.M. COURT AT BENGALURU AND ETC., THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA ORAL ORDER The petitioners being accused Nos.1 to 3 are seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them in Crime No.42/2021 of Madivala Police Station, now pending in C.C.No.12274/2021, on the file of the learned III A.C.M.M. Court, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Section 498A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short 'D.P.Act'). 2. Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2 as informant, filed the first information with Madivala Police - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:1949 CRL.P No. 4759 of 2021 alleging commission of offences punishable under Section 498A read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of D.P.Act, against the petitioners. After investigation, the charge sheet came to be filed for the very same offences. It is the contention of the prosecution that accused No.1 being the husband and accused Nos.2 & 3, who are the in-laws of respondent No.2, abused her in filthy language, assaulted her by demanding additional dowry and they were insisting her to go out of the matrimonial house. Being aggrieved by the registration of criminal case and filing of charge sheet, petitioners are before this Court. 3. Heard Sri Vishruth C., learned counsel for the petitioners, Smt.K.P.Yashodha, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 is absent. No representation. Hence, his argument is taken as nil. Perused the materials on records. 4. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is: - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:1949 CRL.P No. 4759 of 2021 “Whether the petitioners have made out any grounds to allow the petition and to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them?" My answer to the above point is in ‘Affirmative’ for the following: R E A S O N S 5. Respondent No.2 filed the first information with respondent No.1-police stating that accused persons being her husband and in laws were demanding additional dowry, car, bike, site and Rs.10 Lakhs and she was being treated cruelly. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 04.02.2021 at 10:30 P.M., when the accused demanded for additional dowry and assaulted her, as a result of which, she left her matrimonial house along with her children and started to reside at her parental house. It is pertinent to note that Section 323 or 324 of IPC was not attracted either while registering FIR or while filing the charge sheet. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners, placing reliance on the endorsement issued by the Medical Officer of Bowring and Lady Curzon Hospital, Bengaluru, dated 29.03.2021, contended that, no documents were available in the hospital to show that respondent No.2 has taken any treatment on - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:1949 CRL.P No. 4759 of 2021 04.02.2021 or thereafter either as in-patient or out-patient. Learned counsel has also drawn the attention of the Court to the complaint dated 05.02.2021, said to have been filed by respondent No.2 with Begur Police, Bengaluru, alleging that she married accused No.1 during the year 2017 and she had begotten two children. It is alleged that her husband-accused No.1 and in-laws, accused Nos. 2 and 3 started to abuse her in filthy language and treated her cruelly. It is also alleged that she was being assaulted by the accused and dragged out of the house. Thereafter, she came to her parental house and requested the police to register a case. It is pertinent to note that there is no allegation regarding demand or acceptance of dowry at the time of marriage or on 04.02.2021, when the incident is said to have occurred by the accused. 7. Learned counsel has also drawn the attention of the Court to police notice dated 27.02.2021 issued by the Madivala Police to respondent No.2 calling upon her to produce relevant documents in support of her contention that she was assaulted and treated cruelly. It is pertinent to note that no such document is produced by respondent No.2 even though Crime No.42/2021 for the offences punishable under Section 498A - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:1949 CRL.P No. 4759 of 2021 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of D.P.Act was registered. 8. Materials on record prima facie disclose that the alleged incident, according to respondent No.2, had occurred on 04.02.2021. On 05.02.2021, she had filed first information with Begur Police. But, there was no allegation of demand or acceptance of dowry at the time of marriage or on said date. FIR in Crime No.42/2021 came to be filed on 26.02.2021 making allegations that petitioners being husband and in-laws abused respondent No.2 in filthy language and assaulted her and she was being ill treated. There is no documentary evidence supporting the aforesaid allegation and there is also no reference to the earlier complaint dated 05.02.2021 filed with Begur police. On consideration of all these materials on record, I do not find any prima facie case to proceed against the petitioners. Respondent No.2 even though represented by her advocate, remained absent and has not addressed his arguments. There is no explanation for the inordinate delay in filing the present complaint or for not making allegation of dowry when the complaint was filed on 05.02.2021, immediately after alleged incident. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:1949 CRL.P No. 4759 of 2021 9. Under these circumstance, I am of the opinion that there are no reasons to permit the criminal proceedings to continue against the petitioners as it would amount to infringement of the right of the petitioners by compelling them to face the criminal and also abuse of the process of the Court. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the criminal proceeding is liable to be quashed. 10. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the Affirmative and proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is allowed. (ii) The FIR registered in Crime No.42/2021 of Madivala Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 498A read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of D.P.Act, now pending in C.C.No.12274/2021 on the file of III A.C.M.M., Bengaluru, is hereby quashed. Sd/- (M G UMA) JUDGE AV/List No.: 3 Sl No.: 6