- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2365 CRL.P No. 200440 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200440 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. MOHAMMAD WASIM HONWAD S/O MUSA ALI HONAWAD, AGE:34 YEARS, OCC: LABOURER, R/O. 3RD CROSS, GIRANI CHAWL, KARWAR ROAD, HUBBALLI-580029. 2. HASINA MUSALI @ HASEENA BEGUM HONWAD W/O MUSA ALI HONAWAD, AGE:50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O 3RD CROSS, GIRANI CHAWL, KARWAR ROAD, HUBBALLI 580029. 3. ESRATH RAFIQ @ ISHARAT MANIYAR, W/O RAFIQ, AGE:50 YEARS. OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O 1ST CROSS, FATENA NAGAR, HEGGERI, OLD HUBBALLI, HUBBALLI-580024. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI H.N. HANCHINAMANI, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2365 CRL.P No. 200440 of 2025 AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY PSI MUDGAL POLICE STATION, MUDGAL, DIST. RAICHUR, REP. BY ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH AT KALABURAGI. 2. SMT. GULZARBANU W/O WASIM HONWAD, D/O NABISAB KHAJASAB KHADIWAS, R/O. UPPER NANDIHAL VILLAGE, TQ. MUDAGAL, DIST. RAICHUR-584125. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI GOPAL KRISHNA YADAV, HCGP FOR R1; R2 SERVED) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. (OLD), U/SEC. 528 OF BNSS PRAYING TO, QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS PENDING ON THE FILE OF HON’BLE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, LINGASAGUR IN CC NO. 992/2023 AGAINST THE PETITIONER NOS.1, 2 AND 3/ACCUSED NOS.1, 2 AND 3 ATTACHED IN MUDGAL POLICE STAITON, MUDGAL CRIME NO. 98/2023 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE SECTION 498A, 323, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2365 CRL.P No. 200440 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH) 1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking to quash the entire proceedings in C.C No.992/2023 pending on the file of Additional Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Lingasugar, arising out of Crime No.98/2023 of respondent No.1 - police for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’). Factual matrix of the case: 2. The respondent No.2 married the petitioner No.1 on 08.11.2020 at Uppara Nandihal Village, Lingasugur Taluk. The marriage was performed in front of the house of the respondent No.2. After the marriage, the respondent No.2 went and started residing in the house of her husband and in-laws. She further stated that, she stayed happily along with her in-laws at Hubli for six months. Thereafter, she was objected and instructed that she should not talk with her parents and also relatives over - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2365 CRL.P No. 200440 of 2025 the phone. In that context, for that reason, she was being beaten and assaulted and also abused by all the family members. It is further stated that, she had informed the said harassment to her parents. The parents and others convened the meeting and panchayath and advised the family members of the petitioners. Such being the fact, petitioner No.1 took the complainant to parents’ house, left there and asked her to bring dowry to clear his debt and went away. On 28.12.2022, she gave birth to a baby boy and the said news was informed to the parents of petitioner No.1 and also petitioner No.1. However, they did not visit the house of respondent No.2 to see the child. 3. On 30.06.2023, at about 3.00 p.m., the petitioners visited the house of respondent No.2 and insulted, assaulted and abused her saying that she did not bring dowry of Rs.4,00,000/-. The petitioner No.1 was stated to have assaulted respondent No.2 with hands and kicked her with legs. Petitioners No.2 and 3 were stated to have assaulted her by holding her tuft. Therefore, after having discussed the matter with the elders and others, she - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2365 CRL.P No. 200440 of 2025 lodged a complaint before the respondent No.1 - police on 02.07.2023 at about 06.30 p.m. The respondent No.1 - police after having received the complaint, registered a case in Crime No.98/2023 for the aforesaid offences. After conducting the investigation, submitted the charge sheet. The Trial Court took cognizance and registered as C.C.No.992/2023 and issued summons to the petitioners. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioners are before this Court seeking for quashing of the entire proceedings in C.C No.992/2023. 4. Heard Sri. H.N. Hanchinamani, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri.Gopal Krishna Yadav, learned High Court Government Pleader respondent No.1 – State. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the allegations are baseless and bald. She has not been subjected to any cruelty or harassment. However, she made a false allegation against the petitioners on a false pretext. 6. It is further submitted that the averments of the complaint would indicate that, she was instructed not to - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2365 CRL.P No. 200440 of 2025 speak with her parents and relatives over phone for hours together. There is no whisper regarding that the petitioners were demanding Rs.4.00 lakhs from the parents of respondent No.2. Such being the fact, the proceedings has to be quashed. Making such submissions, learned counsel for the petitioners prays to allow the petition. 7. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 – State vehemently justified in filing of the charge sheet and he further submitted that the averments would indicate that the respondent No.2, when she was residing along with her husband – petitioner No.1 and the in-laws who are the petitioners No.2 and 3, all were harassing her on one or the other pretext and also she was being ill-treated in the house even when she wanted to speak with her parents over the phone. Thereafter, the petitioner No.1, who is her husband, took her to her parents’ house and left her and asked her to bring Rs.4.00 lakhs as dowry from her parents’ house. There are allegations which are required to be heard and tried by the Trial Court. At this stage, it - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2365 CRL.P No. 200440 of 2025 would not be appropriate to grant the relief as prayed for. Hence, the petition has to be rejected. Making such submissions, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 prays to dismiss the petition. 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the averments of the charge sheet, it appears from the charge sheet that petitioner No.1 is the husband of respondent No.2, petitioners No.2 and 3 are mother-in-law and sister-in-law of respondent No.2 respectively. She was married to petitioner No.1. Thereafter, she was residing along with them at Hubli. She was being taking care nicely for a period of six months. Thereafter, she was being ill-treated by the petitioners on one or the other pretext. 9. It is further noticed in the averments of the complaint that, she was forced not to talk with her parents and her relatives over the phone. The said fact was made known to the parents of respondent No.2. The parents of respondent No.2 had convened a meeting with the petitioners and instructed them to adjust and proceed in - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2365 CRL.P No. 200440 of 2025 the family matters. However, petitioner No.1 being the husband of respondent No.2 took her and left her in the house of her parents and he had instructed the respondent No.2 that she should bring Rs.4.00 lakhs dowry to clear his debt. Thereafter, on 30.06.2023, around 3.00 p.m., the petitioners went to the house of respondent No.2 and started quarrelling with her. Petitioner No.1 assaulted respondent No.2, petitioners No.2 and 3 also assaulted her by holding the tuft of respondent No.2. 10. As there are serious allegations made against these petitioners and there are materials to proceed to frame the charge, it is not appropriate at this stage quash the proceedings. Hence, the petition is liable to be rejected. Ordered accordingly. In view of disposal of the main petition, pending application, if any, stands disposed of. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE SRT/UN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24 CT:PK