- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32782 WP No. 18001 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI WRIT PETITION NO. 18001 OF 2023 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI KARTHIK B S S/O SHIVAKUMAR B S AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT NIKASH 2ND CROSS, BEHIND VENKATESHWARA SWAMY TEMPLE MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT, TUMKUR-572 103 2. SRI. B C SHIVAKUMAR S/O LATE B S CHANNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT BELLAVI, TUMKURU-572 107 3. SMT. NIRMALA J C W/O SHIVAKUMAR B C AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT BELLAVI, TUMKURU-572 107 4. SRI. MAHESH H B S/O BASAVARAJU AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT 27, SHIVA SADANA I MAIN, AMMA ASHRAMA ROAD, KCHS LAYOUT, NAGADEVANAHALLI, ULLALA, BENGALURU-56 Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32782 WP No. 18001 of 2023 5. SMT. SHAKUNTHALA J C W/O H B MAHESH AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT 27, SHIVA SADANA, I MAIN, AMMA ASHRAMA ROAD, KCHS LAYOUT, NAGADEVANAHALLI, ULLALA, BENGALURU-56 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SUYOG HERELE.E, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH TIPTUR RURAL PS, REP BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-01 2. SMT. HARSHITHA R S AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, W/O KARTHIK B S R/AT SRI. LAKSHMI, NEAR MUDRA COLLEGE OF NURSING, BANDI HALLI GATE, C N HALLI ROAD, TIPTUR, TUMKUR-07 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.B.LAKSHMAN, HCGP FOR R1; SRI.VENKATESH.S.ARABATTI, SPL.PP FOR R2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR AND COMPLAINT IN CRIME NO.61/2023 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES UNDER SECTION 498A, 323, 324, 506, 149 OF IPC AND U/S 3 AND 4 DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT 1961 ON THE FILE OF LEARNED PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR DN) AND JMFC COURT TIPTUR, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32782 WP No. 18001 of 2023 TUMKUR DIST AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT THERETO (PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A AND B). THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DICTATING ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI ORAL ORDER Petitioners who are arraigned as accused Nos.1 to 5 have filed this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India r/w Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the criminal proceedings in Cr.No.61/2023 of Tiptur Rural PS, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 324, 506, 149 of IPC, Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act ('DP Act' for short). 2. In support of the petition, the petitioners have contended that petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are the parents of petitioner No.1. Petitioner Nos.4 and 5 are the brother and sister-in-law of petitioner Nos.2 and 3. The marriage of petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 was performed on 06.12.2019 at Shiva Shanthi Wedding Hall, Tiptur. They - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32782 WP No. 18001 of 2023 are having a son who is now aged 4 years. After the delivery when respondent No.2 failed to return to the matrimonial home, petitioner No.1 filed MC.No.214/2023 for restitution of conjugal rights. Making false allegations of demand of dowry and other allegations, respondent No.2 has filed complaint which is registered in Cr.No.61/2023. 2.1 Petitioners have not committed the alleged offences. They are innocent and law abiding citizens. Only to tarnish their image and reputation and to harass and humiliate them, false complaint is filed. After petitioner No.1 filed petition for restitution of conjugal rights, as an after thought false complaint is filed. The allegations made are vague and bald. Petitioner No.2 is a practicing advocate. Continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of the Court and hence the petition. 3. On the other hand learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 State and - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32782 WP No. 18001 of 2023 learned counsel for respondent No.2 would submit that the marriage of petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 was performed on 06.12.2019 at Tiptur. It was an arranged marriage. Before the marriage, on the insistence of petitioners engagement ceremony was held on 13.06.2019 in a grand manner, spending Rs.2 lakhs. Petitioner No.4 insisted for payment of Rs.2 lakhs towards down payment for purchase of a new car. He took initiative of the marriage. Wedding was celebrated by spending more than Rs.50 lakhs giving gold ornaments and silver articles and cash of Rs.8 lakhs towards the marriage expenses of the groom side. For Honey moon they went to Malaysia and its expenses in a sum of Rs.2 lakhs was also borne by father of respondent No.2. 3.1 After the honey moon when they visited the house of parents of respondent No.2, petitioner No.1 left her there for a period of 40 days. Petitioners did not respond to the franatic calls made by her parents to take her to the matrimonial home. On 19.01.2020, petitioner - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32782 WP No. 18001 of 2023 No.3 made a call to the mother of respondent No.2 and said that respondent No.2 is not suitable for her son and she looks like an old lady. Ultimately, with great difficulty respondent No.2 was sent to the matrimonial home by her parents. 3.2 However, immediately, petitioners started harassing respondent No.2. Petitioner No.1 was shamelessly discussing their personal matters with his father, including the clothes which she was wore on the previous night. He was demanding whether she was having any boy friends and had physical relationship with them. Petitioner No.2 was very abusive and used to talk very low of her parents. Petitioner No.2 was commenting on her. They were not satisfied with the money spent for her marriage. She was forced to do all the household work. Petitioner No.1 used her as a sex slave. Petitioners were demanding respondent No.2 to get a Toyota Innova Crysta or a site. When petitioner No.1 decided to shift to Bengaluru, they, more particularly petitioner Nos.4 and 5 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32782 WP No. 18001 of 2023 started demanding respondent No.2 to get Rs.80 lakhs from her father to purchase a flat in the name of petitioner No.1. Even after she became pregnant, her problem was not solved. Petitioners wanted her to abort the child and in that connection, petitioner No.2 assaulted her. Petitioner No.1 brought a knife and assaulted on her hand, while petitioner No.2 held her hand tightly causing bleeding injury. Since petitioner Nos.1 to 3 panicked and requested her not to file complaint, she did not file the complaint regarding the said incident. 3.3 All the expenses of her delivery were borne by her father, but petitioner No.1 took the bills and got reimbursement. After the delivery when respondent No.2 and her family members went to the house of petitioners to leave her in the matrimonial home, petitioner Nos.1 to 3 quarelled and assaulted them. They forced them out of the matrimonial home. Though in the panchayath, petitioner Nos.1 to 3 promised to take respondent No.2 and the child to their house, they did not fulfill the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32782 WP No. 18001 of 2023 promise. When the things did not improve, respondent No.2 filed the complaint. After conducting detailed investigation, charge sheet is filed against the petitioner Nos.2 to 5. There is prima facie material to proceed against the petitioners and pray to dismiss the petition. 4. On 07.08.2025, learned counsel for petitioners filed a memo seeking permission to withdraw the petition so far as petitioner No.1/accused No.1 is concerned. In the light of the same, petition is dismissed as withdrawn so far as petitioner No.1 is concerned, with a liberty to challenge the charge sheet, if so advised and permissible under law. 5. Heard arguments and perused the record. 6. The relationship between the parties is not in dispute. The marriage of petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 was performed on 06.12.2019. It is alleged that before the marriage on the demand made by petitioners, an engagement ceremony was held spending more than - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32782 WP No. 18001 of 2023 Rs.2 lakhs. For the marriage also, nearly Rs.50 lakhs was spent. Even the expenses for honey moon was borne by the father of respondent No.2. However, the petitioners were not satisfied. It is alleged that immediately after returning from honey moon, petitioner No.1 left respondent No.2 in her parental home and only after persistent requests, she was allowed to come to the matrimonial home after 40 days. 7. Specific allegations are made in the complaint regarding the harassment meted out by the petitioners demanding money to purchase Innova Crysta or a site and ultimately, when petitioner No.1 decided to shift to Bengaluru, a demand was made for purchasing a Flat and petitioner Nos.4 and 5 were instrumental in making the said demand. After the delivery of respondent No.2, petitioners have failed to take her and the child to the matrimonial home and when her parents and brother brought her to the matrimonial home with the child, they - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32782 WP No. 18001 of 2023 were assaulted and forcibly removed out the house. Ultimately, after waiting all this period, when things did not improve, respondent No.2 took the extreme step of filing the complaint. 8. The complaint averments makes out a strong prima facie case against all the petitioners. The allegations made are very grave and require a full fledged investigation. In the light of the same, it cannot be said that the continuation of proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of the Court and therefore the petition is liable to be dismissed and accordingly, the following: ORDER (i) Petition filed by the accused No.1 is dismissed as withdrawn, reserving liberty to challenge the charge sheet if so advised and permissible under law. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32782 WP No. 18001 of 2023 (ii) Petition filed by petitioner Nos. 2 to 5/accused Nos.2 to 5 under Section 482 Cr.P.C is rejected. Sd/- (J.M.KHAZI) JUDGE RR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39