- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3965 CRL.P No. 102795 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102795 OF 2023 BETWEEN: 1. SHRI. SADANAND S/O. GURURAJ KYASTI AGE. 36 YEARS, OCC. PRIVATE WORK, R/O. DOOR NO.C/11, SOMESHWARA APARTMENT, BEHIND R.N.SHETTI STADIUM, NEAR JUBLI CIRCLE, DHARWAD-580001. 2. SHRI. GURURAJ S/O. MALLAPPA KYASTI AGE. 65 YEARS, OCC. PRIVATE WORK, R/O. DOOR NO.C/11, SOMESHWARA APARTMENT, BEHIND R.N.SHETTI STADIUM, NEAR JUBLI CIRCLE, DHARWAD-580001. 3. SMT. JAYASHREE W/O. GURURAI KYASTI AGE. 63 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE, R/O. DOOR NO.C/11, SOMESHWARA APARTMENT, BEHIND R.N.SHETTI STADIUM, NEAR JUBLI CIRCLE, DHARWAD-580001. 4. SHRI. NITIN S/O. GURURAJ KYASTI AGE. 39 YEARS, OCC. PRIVATE WORK, R/O. DOOR NO.C/11, SOMESHWARA APARTMENT, BEHIND R.N.SHETTI STADIUM, NEAR JUBLI CIRCLE, DHARWAD-580001. PETITIONERS NOW RESIDING AT. C/O. MEERABAI N. MAHENDRAKAR, 2ND CROSS, MAHENDRAKAR CHAWL, NEAR K.C. PARK, DHARWAD. …PETITIONERS (BY SMT. ARCHANA A.MAGADUM, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3965 CRL.P No. 102795 of 2023 AND: SMT. GOURI SADANAND KYASTI AGE. 33 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE, R/O. MANGALWAR PETH, VERAKTA MATH ONI, DHARWAD-580001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. S.H.BALAGANNAVAR, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 482 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO, CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN CRL.MISC NO. 184/2023 AND QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CRL.MISC NO. 184/2023 PENDING REGISTERED U/SEC. 12 OF PROTECTION OF WOMEN OF D.V. ACT PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, DHARWAD IN SO FAR AS PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioners challenge the registration of Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 184/2023, filed under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (hereinafter “the Act”). 2. The respondent asserts that she is the legally wedded wife of petitioner No. 1, with their marriage solemnized on 26.12.2021, and that petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are her parents-in-law while petitioner No. 4 is her brother-in-law. She alleges that during her stay in the matrimonial home, she was subjected to mental and physical cruelty and further claimed maintenance from petitioner No. 1. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3965 CRL.P No. 102795 of 2023 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners argued that, on similar allegations, the respondent had previously filed a complaint for offences under Sections 498A, 323, and 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. This complaint was quashed by this Court in Criminal Petition No. 103750/2022 on the basis that the allegations were entirely without substance. Accordingly, the petition filed under Section 12 of the Act is not maintainable. 4. In response, the learned counsel for the respondent contended that the petition filed under Section 12 of the Act is independent of the earlier complaint, is maintainable, and that the respondent is entitled to claim maintenance from petitioner No. 1. On this basis, the respondent sought dismissal of the petition. 5. The arguments of the learned counsel for both parties have been duly considered. 6. In Criminal Petition No. 103750/2022, this Court quashed the registration of the FIR against the petitioners for the offences in question, as detailed in the observations in paras 7, 8, and 9 of that decision, which reads thus . “7. Perusal of the First Information Report lodged by the respondent No.2 indicates that except omnibus and general allegations there are no specific allegations as against each of the accused, as to how, and in what manner, they subjected the informant to cruelty. The informant has alleged that the accused used to abuse her when she used to go out of the matrimonial home, and contrary to the said allegation, she has alleged that the accused abused her when she did not accede to their demand to look out for a job. 8. The Apex Court in the case of KahkashanKausar @ Sonam & Others v State of Bihar & Others in Criminal Appeal - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3965 CRL.P No. 102795 of 2023 No.195/2022 has held that general and omnibus allegations cannot manifest in a situation where the relatives of the complainant’s husband are forced to undergo trial. In the instant case, there is no specific allegation even against the accused No.1- husband as to how and in what manner and date and place on which the accused No.1 subjected the respondent No.2 to cruelty. 9. The alleged last incident that she was pushed against the wall took place on 08.07.2022 which implies that she was not residing in the matrimonial home since then, and the FIR was lodged only on 12.11.2022. It is stated that the informant had approached the Women Police Station on 28.10.2022 i.e., after two and half months from the date of alleged incident, and the accused No.1 before the police stated that they would settle the dispute amicably in front of the well wishers, and since the dispute was not settled, she was constrained to lodge the FIR. Except the said statement, no plausible explanation is offered for the delay, which creates a doubt resulting in embellishment and exaggeration, and it has to be inferred that the FIR was lodged as an afterthought with an ulterior motive to wreak vengeance and with revengeful intent giving a criminal texture to a dispute arising out of marital discord. The allegation in the FIR that the accused No.1 has stated before the Women Police Station that they would settle the dispute amicably before the elders and also the settlement talks failed thereafter also establishes that the dispute between the parties arises out of marital discord.” 7. Since the allegations in the FIR and those in the petition under Section 12 of the Act are similar, and in light of the finality of the order in Criminal Petition No. 103750/2022, the petition under Section 12 of the Act is not maintainable. 8. In view of the above, the continuation of criminal proceedings would constitute an abuse of the process of law. Accordingly, the petition is allowed, and the impugned proceedings in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 184/2023, pending on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Dharwad, are hereby quashed. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3965 CRL.P No. 102795 of 2023 Liberty is reserved with the respondent to seek maintenance from petitioner No. 1 if permissible and in accordance with law. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE AC Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 124