- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17228 CRL.P No. 104536 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO.104536 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. SHRI. VITTAL S/O. RAMANNA BHADANKAR, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, OCC. NOT WORKING, R/A. HAVERIPET, KURUBAR ONI, MRUTYUNJAY NAGAR, DHARWAD-580008. 2. SMT. RADHA W/O. SATISH, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/A #25, 2ND CROSS, NEAR SIDDARTH PUBLIC SCHOOL, CHOUDAYYA BLOCK, BENGALURU NORTH, R.T. NAGAR, BENGALURU-560032. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. NAYANA KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY DHARWAD WOMEN P.S., STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD. Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17228 CRL.P No. 104536 of 2025 2. SMT. AMBIKA W/O. RAJU V. BADAMKAR, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC. HOME MAKER, R/A. SANTOSH NILAYA SHARAVATI NAGAR, 2ND CROSS, SHIVAMOGGA-577201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y.DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. (SECTION 528 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 29.07.2025 PASSED BY THE 2ND ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC-II, DHARWAD ON I.A. FILED UNDER SECTION 205 OF CR.P.C IN C.C. NO.884/2013 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.3 AND 5 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-C AND ALLOW THE I.A. FILED UNDER SECTION 205 OF CR.P.C BY THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.3 AND 5 SEEKING PERMANENT EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 205 OF CR.P.C IN C.C. NO.884/2013 BEFORE THE 2ND ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, DHARWAD FROM PERSONAL APPEARANCE PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,. THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17228 CRL.P No. 104536 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH) 1. The present petition is filed by the petitioners being aggrieved by the rejection of application filed for permanent exemption under Section 205 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 19731. 2. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that, petitioner No.1 is the father-in-law of respondent No.2 who is suffering from old age ailments and he is unable to move from one place to another. The allegations made against him are not specific and particular. Therefore, his presence before the trial Court on all hearing dates may not be necessary. 3. Similarly, it is further submitted that petitioner No.2 is the sister-in-law of respondent No.2 who is the resident of Bengaluru. No specific allegations are made out 1 for short ‘Cr.P.C.’ - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17228 CRL.P No. 104536 of 2025 against her to attract the ingredients of Section 498A of Indian Penal Code, 18602. Such being the fact, asking her to appear before the trial Court on all hearing dates coming from Bengaluru to the Court at Dharwad would not serve any purpose. Therefore, the application ought to have been allowed by the trial Court. The rejection of the application is erroneous and therefore, the petition has to be allowed. 4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently submitted that the appearance of accused in criminal proceedings on three occasions are very much essential. First one is at the time of framing of charge, secondly, at the time of recording the statements under Section 313 of Cr.P.C and thirdly, at the time of pronouncement of judgment. These are all the crucial stages where the accused must be present either physically or through video conference. Permitting exemption in 2 for short ‘IPC’ - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17228 CRL.P No. 104536 of 2025 respect of the petitioners has rightly been rejected by the trial Court. Hence, the petition may be dismissed. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also on perusal of the averments of the petition, it appears from the record that, petitioner No.1 is having old age ailments and he is unable to move from one place to another without any assistance. On perusal of the allegations leveled against him in the complaint, it is appropriate to consider the application in order to maintain quietus between the parties. 6. As regards petitioner No.2 is concerned, on perusal of the averments made in the complaint against her also is not sufficient to deny the prayer made by her under Section 205 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, it is appropriate to allow the said application. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is allowed. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17228 CRL.P No. 104536 of 2025 (ii) The order dated 29.07.2025 passed by the 2nd Additional Civil Judge and JMFC-II, Dharwad on I.A. under Section 205 of Cr.P.C. in C.C. No.884/2013 is set-aside. (iii) The application filed by the petitioners under Section 205 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. (iv) The appearance of the petitioners before the trial Court is exempted permanently except under three circumstances namely at the time of framing of charge, at the time of recording statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and at the time of pronouncement of judgment. Sd/- (S.RACHAIAH) JUDGE RH/CT: UMD List No.: 2 Sl No.: 35