- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33949 CRL.P No. 8830 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8830 OF 2022 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. SHIVAMALLAMMA W/O LATE SRI NANJUNDA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O NO.566, 4TH CROSS SWARNASANDRA SUGAR TOWN MANDYA -571402 2. MAHADEVA N S/O LATE SRI NANJUNDA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O NO.566, 4TH CROSS SWARNASANDRA SUGAR TOWN MANDYA -571 402 3. SMT GOWRI N W/O P RAVI AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O NO.90/01/58 2ND MAIN, 11ST CROSS VITTAL NAGAR, CHAMRAJPET BANGALORE -560 080 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. RAGHU PRASAD B S, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33949 CRL.P No. 8830 of 2022 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BYATARAYANAPURA P S REP BY SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE -560 001 2. SMT SHRUTHI MANJUNATH W/O RAMESH AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O NO.8/4, SRK NIVASA HOSAKEREHALLI MAIN ROAD BYATARAYANAPURA, MYSORE ROAD BANGALORE -560 026 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.N.ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP FOR R1; SRI.R.B.SADASHIVAPPA, 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.5589/2022 ON THE FILE OF 31ST A.C.M.M AT BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A,506 R/W 34 OF IPC AND SEC.3,4 OF D.P ACT. 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 In this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C, petitioners who are arraigned as accused Nos.2 to 4 have sought for quashing criminal proceedings initiated against them in C.C.No.5589/2022 on the file of XXXI ACMM, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33949 CRL.P No. 8830 of 2022 Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 506 r/w Section 34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 2. In support of the petition, petitioners have contended that they have not committed the alleged offences and have been falsely implicated to harass them. Petitioners are the mother-in-law, brother-in-law and sister-in-law of complainant. Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are living at Mandya. Petitioner No.3 is married long back and living separately. Except omnibus and vague allegations, there are no material to connect them with the alleged crime. Continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of the Court. 3. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for petitioners has relied upon the following decisions: (i) Mange Ram Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (Mange Ram)1 1 SLP(Crl)No.10817/2024 Dt: 12.08.2025 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33949 CRL.P No. 8830 of 2022 (ii) Suman Mishra and Ors. Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr. (Suman Mishra)2 (iii) Manjunath and Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka and Anr. (Manjunath)3 (iv) Abhishek Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (Abhishek)4 (v) Achin Gupta Vs. State of Haryana (Achin Gupta)5 (iv) Mahalakshmi Vs. State of Karnataka (Mahalakshmi)6 (vi) Aiyappa M.B Vs. State of Karnataka (Aiyappa)7 (vii) Kailashben Mahendrabhai Patel Vs. State of Maharashtra (Kailashben Mahendrabhai Patel)8 4. On the other hand, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and learned counsel for respondent No.2 would submit that the marriage of accused No.1 and respondent No.2 was celebrated on 23.11.2020. She is the only daughter of 2 SLP(Crl)No.9218/2024 Dt: 12.02.2025 3 W.P.No.33819/2024 Dt: 10.06.2025 4 LAWS(SC)-2023-8-87 5 LAWS(SC)-2024-5-13 6 LAWS(KAR)-2023-6-25 7 LAWs(SC)-2023-8-87 8 LAWS(SC)-2024-9-69 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33949 CRL.P No. 8830 of 2022 her parents. At the time of marriage, gold ornaments were given to complainant as well as accused No.1. A sum of Rs.3 lakhs was paid to accused No.1 in cash and another sum of Rs.1 lakh was paid by way of Varopachara (type in kannada). A car, an industrial land measuring 1 acre and a site measuring 40' x 40' consisting of 3 floor building under construction are standing in the name of complainant. Marriage was performed by spending Rs.40 lakhs. 5. It is alleged that for a period of 3 months, things went well. Later on accused No.4 claiming to be the sister of accused No.1 started visiting their house and used to quarrel demanding cash and gold ornaments. About one month prior to the filing of the present complaint, she gave a complaint and the police officer summoned accused persons and advised them. Since the harassment did not stop, she is filing the complaint. Based on the complaint, case is registered and after - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33949 CRL.P No. 8830 of 2022 conducting detailed investigation, charge sheet is filed. There is prima facie material to proceed against the petitioners. Disputed facts cannot be decided in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C and pray to dismiss the same. 6. Heard arguments and perused the record. 7. Thus, petitioners who are arraigned as accused Nos.2 to 4 and who are the mother, brother and sister of accused No.1 are seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings, contending that they are living separately from accused No.1 and complainant. Unnecessarily they are implicated. During the arguments, learned counsel for petitioners submitted that the father of the complainant has incurred heavy debts to carry on business and because of the same, complainant was forcing accused No.1 to pay money and in fact he has made several payments through account transfer. It is also submitted - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33949 CRL.P No. 8830 of 2022 that as evident from the messages exchanged between complainant and accused No.1, complainant is carrying on the business of her father and to force the accused No.1 heed to her demands she attempted suicide and was saved. In fact he has filed M.C.No.5/2022 for divorce. Since 10 months prior to the filing of the complaint, she is not living with accused No.1. On 16.12.2021, accused No.1 filed a complaint with Byatarayanapura Police, after which she has chosen to file the present complaint. 8. So far as petitioners are concerned, they are not living with accused No.1 and complainant. Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are married brother and sister of accused No.1. There are no specific allegations in the complaint and charge sheet so far as petitioners are concerned. Therefore, continuation of criminal proceedings against them would amount to abuse of the process of the Court and as such the criminal proceedings are liable to be quashed against them and accordingly, the following: - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33949 CRL.P No. 8830 of 2022 ORDER (i) Petition filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 4 under Section 482 Cr.P.C is hereby allowed. (ii) The criminal proceedings in C.C.No.5589/2022 on the file of XXXI ACMM, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 506 r/w Section 34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, is hereby quashed so far as petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 4 are concerned. (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.: 39