- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4017 CRL.P No. 100137 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100137 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. VENKATESH G.M., S/O. MUDALAGIRIYAPPA, AGE. 34 YEARS, OCC. P.H.D.STUDENT. 2. MUDALAGIRIYAPPA, S/O. THIMAPPA, AGE. 62 YEARS, OCC. NIL 3. SARASWATHI, W/O. MUDALAGIRIYAPPA, AGE. 59 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, ALL R/O. BEHIND GOVT. SCHOOL, GOSIKERE VILLAGE, PARASHURAMPURA HOBLI, CHALLAKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, PERMANENT ADDRESS: 58TH WARD, NEAR NATIONAL HOTEL, 10DP LAYOUT, CHITHRADURG, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, KARNATAKA. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. ANANDKUMAR A. MAGADUM AND SMT. ARCHANA A.MAGADUM, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH HOSPET RURAL, P.S. REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENCH, AT DHARWAD-580001. 2. HONNURAMMA M, W/O. VENKATESH G M, Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4017 CRL.P No. 100137 of 2025 AGE. 34 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE, R/O. K.VEERAPURA VILLAGE, BALLARI TQ.DIST, NOW STATION ROAD 3RD CROSS, NEAR HUCCHINGEMMA TEMPLE, P.K. NAYAKANAHALLI, HOSAPETE, TQ. VIJAYANAGARA-583201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ASHOK T.KATTIMANI, AGA FOR R1 SRI. NEELENDRA D. GUNDE, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (528 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO, CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN CC NO.9313/2024 PENDING BEFORE THE PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, COURT, HOSAPETE AND QUASH THE ORDER DATED 06.12.2024 PASSED BY THE II ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, COURT, HOSAPETE, IN CC NO.9313/2024 TAKING COGNIZANCE AGAINST PETITIONERS FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 85, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 3(5) OF BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA (BNS) AGAINST THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1, 2 AND 3 AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioners/accused Nos. 1 to 3 are facing prosecution for offences under Sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351(2), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”). They have approached this Court seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 9313/2024, pending on the file of the II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Hosapete. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4017 CRL.P No. 100137 of 2025 2. The prosecution alleges that Accused No. 1 is the husband and that Accused Nos. 2 and 3 are his parents-in-law. It is further stated that the marriage between Accused No. 1 and the de facto complainant was solemnized on 18.12.2022. The prosecution claims that the petitioners/accused subjected the de facto complainant to mental and physical cruelty and threatened her with dire consequences. 3. The Court has heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Additional Government Advocate for Respondent No.1 (the State), and the learned counsel for Respondent No.2. 4. A perusal of the charge sheet indicates that the only specific allegation against Accused Nos. 2 and 3 is that they would call Accused No. 1 and insist that he contract a second marriage. Apart from this general allegation, there are no specific overt acts attributed to Accused Nos. 2 and 3. However , there are specific allegations against Accused No. 1, and those allegations will need to be proved at trial. 5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Kahkashan Kausar alias Sonam & Others v. State of Bihar & Others, expressed concern over the misuse of Section 498A of the IPC, noting that implicating the husband’s relatives in matrimonial disputes without a proper assessment of the allegations can lead to an abuse of the legal process. It was emphasized that when general and omnibus allegations are levied against multiple accused without a specific role being established for each, the prosecution fails to make out a - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4017 CRL.P No. 100137 of 2025 prima facie case. Forcing the trial of the husband’s relatives based on such unsubstantiated allegations is unjust and inflicts undue hardship on the accused. 6. In light of the foregoing, it is evident that while there are specific overt acts attributed to Accused No. 1, there are no such specific allegations against Accused Nos. 2 and 3. Therefore, the continuation of criminal proceedings against Accused Nos. 2 and 3 would be an abuse of the process of law. Hence, I pass the following ORDER i) Accordingly, the petition is allowed in part. ii) The petition in respect of petitioner No.1/accused No.1 is dismissed. iii) The criminal proceedings in C.C. No.9313/2024 pending on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Hosapete, insofar as it relates to petitioners No.2 and 3/accused Nos.2 and 3, is hereby quashed. iv) The Trial Court shall proceed against petitioner No.1/accused No.1 in accordance with law without being influenced by any of the observations made in the order, and the observations made, if any, are only for the purpose of this petition. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4017 CRL.P No. 100137 of 2025 Pending I.As., if any, do not survive for consideration and are disposed off accordingly. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE KMS Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13