- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:3438 WP No. 35301 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.35301 OF 2024 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: C.P.PAVITHRA @ PAVITHRA POONACHA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, D/O CHINDAMADA POONACHA THAMMAIAH, R/A THUCHAMAKERI, CHIKKA MANDUR, KODAGU, CHIKKAMANDUR – 571 216. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SATYANARAYANA CHALKE S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE SHO, RAMANAGARA POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY HCGP, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 001. 2. BHUVANESHWARI @ PAVITHRA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, W/O YADU KUMAR, R/A NO.418, B M JAGADESSHA LAYOUT, RAMANAGARA TOWN, RAMANAGARA – 562 159. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. TEJESH, HCGP FOR R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 528 OF THE BHARATHIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.230/2020 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 323 AND 498A READ WITH SECTION 34 OF THE IPC AND FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 3 AND 4 OF THE DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT RAMANAGARA (ANNEXURE-G) IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED. Digitally signed by LEELAVATHI S R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:3438 WP No. 35301 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “i) Quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.230/2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 498A read with Section 34 of the IPC and for the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act pending on the file of the Learned Civil Judge and JMFC at Ramanagara (Annexure – ‘G’) in so far as petitioner is concerned. ii) Pass any such other orders in favour of the Petitioner that Hon’ble Court deems fit and necessary, in the circumstance of case, in the interest of Justice.” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for respondent No.1 and perused the material on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the light of the order dated 02.11.2015 passed in Crl.A.No.1449/2015 by the Apex Court, the Trial Court before whom C.C.No.230/2020, in which the petitioner is the sole accused, was directed to proceed with the matter to the limited / restricted offence punishable only - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:3438 WP No. 35301 of 2024 under Section 323 of IPC and not with regard to any other offences. The said order reads as under: “Leave granted. The appellant being aggrieved by the initiation of criminal proceeding forming the subject matter of Crime No.294 of 2014, for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 323, 498A read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, has approached the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore, in Criminal Petition No.2689 of 2014, for quashment of the said criminal case, mainly on the ground that the ingredients of the offences were not in existence. The High Court after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, declined to interfere. We have heard Mr. H.K. Naik, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. B. Subrahmanya Prasad, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and Ms. Anitha Shenoy, learned counsel for the respondent-State. On a perusal of the complaint, we find that the appellant in no way is connected with the family of the husband and, in any case, no role has been ascribed to her in respect of the demand of dowry. The only allegation that is demonstrable from the complaint, which is quite lengthy one, is that she had assaulted the daughter of the complainant, that is, the wife. Regard being had to the factual matrix of the case, we think it appropriate that the trial against the appellant should - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:3438 WP No. 35301 of 2024 proceed only in respect of Section 323 IPC and the criminal cases in respect of the other offences are quashed. The appeal is allowed in part and the order passed by the High Court is modified to the extent indicated herein- above. 4. The said submission is placed on record. 5. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the order of the Apex Court directing proceedings to be continued against the petitioner only in relation to Section 323 of IPC, I deem it just and appropriate to dispose of this petition directing the Trial Court to proceed with the trial only to the limited / restricted extent of Section 323 IPC insofar as petitioner – accused No.7 is concerned and pass appropriate orders and dispose of the proceedings in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. 6. Subject to the aforesaid observations and directions, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE SV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 85