- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31225 CRL.P No. 7494 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7494 OF 2023 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SRI. RAJ GOPAL R S/O SRI. N K RAM SETTY AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC: DRIVING TRAINER R/O 18/8, ASHWATH KATTE MAIN ROAD, NEAR CHAMPHOR FACTORY, KASTHURI BA NAGAR, MYSURU ROAD TOLGATE, BENGALURU-560 026 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. DINESHA M BHAT, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KORAMANGALA POLICE STATION, THROUGH STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001 2. MRS. DIVYASHREE S @ MEGHANA W/O SRI.HARIKUMAR B.J AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, C/O PANKAJA SHEKAR, SRIGANDHA KAVAL D GROUP, NO.210, MADUNILAYA, 13TH MAIN ROAD, Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31225 CRL.P No. 7494 of 2023 6TH CROSS, BENGALURU-5600072. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.VINAY MAHADEVAIAH, HCGP FOR R1; SRI.C.M.KEMPEGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.12647/2019 PENDING BEFORE THE XLI ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE BENGALURU INCLUDING THE COMPLIANT DATED 19.01.2019 FIR IN CR.NO.15/2019 DATED 19.01.2019 AND THE CHARGE SHEET DATED 30.03.2019 FILED BY KORAMANAGALA POLICE STATION MADIVALA SUB DIVISION FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S.498-A,34 OF IPC 1860 AND SEC.3 AND 4 OF DP ACT 1961 REGISTERED AGAINST THE PETITIONER (ACCUSED NO.4) AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT THERETO PRODUCED AS DOCUMENT NO.1,2,3 AND 4 RESPECTIVELY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DICTATING ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI ORAL ORDER Petitioner who is arraigned as accused No.4 has filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him in C.C.No.12647/2019 on the file of XLI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, for the offence punishable under Sections 498A r/w 34 of IPC Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31225 CRL.P No. 7494 of 2023 2. In support of the petition, petitioner has contended that he is innocent and law abiding citizen. He has not committed the alleged offences. the Complainant averment does not attract provisions for which the complaint is registered. On account of false implication his reputation, good will, and image in the society is affected. There are no specific allegation against the petitioner. Respondent No.2 has left the matrimonial home long back. The petitioner staying separately from respondent No.2 and her family and as such question of he harassing her would not arise. There is inordinate delay in filing the complaint. The continuation of criminal proceedings against him would amount to abuse of the process of the Court and hence, the petition. 3. On the other hand learned HCGP and learned counsel representing the respondent No.2/complainant would submit that the marriage of respondent No.2 and accused No.1 was performed on 17.08.2017, by spending Rs.20 lakhs. However, accused No.1 refused to have - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31225 CRL.P No. 7494 of 2023 physical relationship for a period of 2 years. 10 days after the marriage, though they started living separately from other accused, they used to visit them regularly. All the accused persons used to harass her for not getting dowry. 3.1. Accused No.1 used to work in night shift and there was no co-operation, love and affection from him. He was not even getting her medicine and demanding that her family members can visit them only with his permission. The elder sister of accused No.1 i.e., accused No.3 was staying with them and this fact was not revealed before the marriage. Respondent No.2 came to know that earlier accused No.1 was engaged to some other girl and looking to his character, she refused to marry him. Though several panchayaths were held, the accused persons did not stop harassment. Since the intentions of accused No.3 and petitioner who is her husband is not good, they could not adjust. Despite police giving advise and taking undertaking, things did not improve. During Ashada - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31225 CRL.P No. 7494 of 2023 month, respondent No.2 was sent to her parents house. So far accused No.1 has not come to take her back and blocked her number. Accused No.1 is demanding Rs.5 lakhs to set up separate residence and hence, the complaint. 3.2 Based on the complaint, case is registered and after investigation, charge sheet is filed. It makes out a strong prima facie case and pray to dismiss the petition. 4. Heard arguments and perused the record. 5. It is pertinent to note that petitioner is the brother-in-law of accused No.1 i.e, husband of sister of accused No.1. He and his wife are living separately from accused No.1 and his mother. From the complaint averments it is evident that the main grievance of complainant is against her husband i.e, accused No.1. He was working in night shift and during the daytime he used - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31225 CRL.P No. 7494 of 2023 to sleep. There was no physical relationship between him and complainant. 6. Except the allegations that petitioner and his wife were also demanding dowry, there are no specific averments as to what exactly was the harassment meted out by the petitioner towards her. The complaint also reveal that several panchayaths were held and even though on many occasion, accused No.2 was advised, he had no emotional connection with her and he never treated her with love and affection. 7. Except the omnibus allegations, no specific allegations are made against the petitioner. Time and again, in the complaint it is alleged that there was demand for additional dowry. However, there are no averments that at the marriage dowry was paid and what exactly was the demand for additional dowry. On the other hand in the complaint it is stated that accused No.1 put a condition that if she wants him to set up a separate residence, she - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31225 CRL.P No. 7494 of 2023 should get Rs.5 lakhs from her family. It appears the complainant wanted accused No.1 to set up a separate residence and he was not willing and this was the cause for the alleged demand of Rs.5 lakhs by accused No.1. 8. Certainly, there are no specific allegations against the petitioner. In the light of the same, continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner would amount to abuse of the process of the Court and the same is liable to be quashed and accordingly the following: ORDER (i) Petition filed by petitioner/accused No.4 under Section 482 Cr.P.C is hereby allowed. (ii) The criminal proceedings initiated against petitioner/accused No.4 in C.C.No.12647/2019 on the file of XLI - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31225 CRL.P No. 7494 of 2023 ACMM, Bengaluru, for the offence punishable under Sections 498A r/w Section 34 of IPC Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act (arising out of Cr.No.15/2019 of Koramangala PS) is hereby quashed. (iii) The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial Court through e-mail. Sd/- (J.M.KHAZI) JUDGE RR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 60