- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6659 CRL.P No. 103734 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.103734 OF 2023 BETWEEN: 1. SUSHELAMMA W/O. SHANKRAPPA, AGE: 64 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O: KARURU VILLAGE, TQ: SIRGUPPA, DIST: BALLARI – 583 120. 2. SHANKRAPPA S/O. LATE MARI DODDAPPA, AGE: 69 YEARS, OCC: LABORER, R/O: KARURU VILLAGE, TQ: SIRGUPPA, DIST: BALLARI – 583 120. 3. ROOPA W/O. M. VEERANA GOUDA, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O: GADVAL RURAL MEHABUB NAGAR, DIST: MAHBUBNAGAR, STATE: TELANGANA – 509 125. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SHIVA SHIRUR, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6659 CRL.P No. 103734 of 2023 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH PSI BALLARI WOMEN POLICE STATION. 2. YASHODHA W/O. NATARAJ, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O: 1ST CROSS, MARUTI COLONY, TQ AND DIST: BALLARI – 583 101 …RESPONDENTS [BY SRI. RAMESH B. CHIGARI, AGA FOR R1; SRI VADIRAJ P. VADAVI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 (ABSENT)] THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT AND FIR IN BALLARI WOMEN PS CRIME NO. 99/2019 AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO. 293/2020 PENDING BEFORE THE IV ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BALLARI FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 498A, 323, 504 READ WITH 34 OF IPC, INSOFAR AS PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.2 TO 4 ARE CONCERNED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6659 CRL.P No. 103734 of 2023 ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 4 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to quash the complaint and FIR in Crime No.99/2019 of Ballari Women Police station and further proceedings in C.C.No.293/2020 pending on the file of IV Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Ballari registered for offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 r/w Section 34 of IPC. 2. Respondent No.2 has filed a complaint and the same came to be registered in Crime No.99/2019 of Ballari women P.S against the petitioners and another for offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 504, 323 r/w Section 34 of IPC. After investigation, chargesheet has been filed against the petitioners and another for the aforesaid offences. 3. On the basis of the said chargesheet, a case has been registered against the petitioners and another in C.C.No.293/2020 and it is pending on the file of IV Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Ballari. The proceedings - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6659 CRL.P No. 103734 of 2023 of the said criminal case are sought to be quashed by the present petitioners in this petition. There is no specific accusation against the petitioners in column No.17 of the chargesheet. 4. On perusal of the complaint filed by respondent No.2, the accusation against the petitioners that they being mother-in-law, father-in-law and sister-in-law used to abuse and assault her and harassed her. 5. Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1-State. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 is absent. 6. Learned counsel for petitioners would contend that there is no specific overt-act alleged against the petitioners and what is alleged is general omnibus allegation. He further submits that the respondent No.2 and her husband/accused No.1 are residing separately since the birth of two children in Ballari and petitioners - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6659 CRL.P No. 103734 of 2023 No.1 and 2 are residing in Karuru village and petitioner No.3 is residing in Gadwal, Telangana State. He submits that the specific accusation is against accused No.1. With this, he prayed for allowing the petition and quashing proceedings against the petitioners. 7. Learned Additional Government Advocate would contend that CWs.6 and 7 are children of respondent No.2 and her husband/accused No.1 and they have stated that these petitioners used to come to their house and used to abuse her mother and assault her. He submits that on perusal of the chargesheet, there is a case against the petitioners for the offences alleged against them. With this, he prayed for dismissal of the petition. 8. Having heard learned counsels, the Court has perused the chargesheet material on record. 9. On perusal of column No.17 of the chargesheet, there is no allegation against the petitioners/accused No.2 to 4. The allegation in it is against accused No.1 assaulting - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6659 CRL.P No. 103734 of 2023 respondent No.2 with hands and harassing her physically and mentally. 10. On perusal of averments of the complaint filed by respondent No.2, statement of her two children-CWs.6 and 7, statement of father, mother, brother and other relatives of respondent No.2, the accusation against the petitioners is general omnibus allegation. On reading statements of them, it is clear that the petitioners were residing separately and respondent No.2 and her husband were residing in Ballari after birth of the children. There is no date and specific allegation against the petitioners. The accusation against the petitioners is general omnibus allegation. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam and Others V/s State of Bihar and Others1has held as under: “18.The above-mentioned decisions clearly demonstrate that this court has at numerous instances expressed concern over the misuse of section 498A IPC and the increased 1 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 141 - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6659 CRL.P No. 103734 of 2023 tendency of implicating relatives of the husband in matrimonial disputes, without analysing the long term ramifications of a trial on the complainant as well as the accused. It is further manifest from the said judgments that false implication by way of general omnibus allegations made in the course of matrimonial dispute, if left unchecked would result in misuse of the process of law. Therefore, this court by way of its judgments has warned the courts from proceeding against the relatives and in-laws of the husband when no prima facie case is made out against them.” 11. The accusations against the petitioners are general omnibus allegations. The respondent No.2 and her husband/accused No.1 and their children were residing in Ballari. The petitioners were residing separately. Considering all these aspects, the continuation of proceedings against the petitioners is abuse of process of law. 12. In the result, the following: - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6659 CRL.P No. 103734 of 2023 ORDER i. The petition is allowed. ii. The proceedings against the petitioners/ accused No.2 to 4 in C.C.No.293/2020 pending on the file of IV Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Ballari are quashed. Sd/- (SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE RKM CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 49