- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47895 CRL.P No. 14090 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 14090 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SMT. SHOBA K V AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS W/O SURESH GOWDA R/A NO. 615, ‘O’ BLOCK PLATINUM CITY, PEENYA BENGALURU. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVI M R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA NUGEHALLI POLICE STATION CHENNARAYAPATNA TALUK HASSAN REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU 560 002. 2. MANJAMMA W/O RANGEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, BADAKANAHALLI VILLAGE, NUGGENALLI HOBLI, Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47895 CRL.P No. 14090 of 2025 CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.ANOOP KUMAR M.V., HCGP FOR R1) THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO.483/2025 (CRIME NO.86/2025) PENDING BEFORE THE II ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC CHANNARAYAPATNA HASSAN FILED AGAINST HER BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 126(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2) OF BNS AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER Petitioner, being aggrieved by the proceedings initiated against her, pending in C.C.No.483/2025 on the file of the II Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Channarayapatna, has preferred this petition to quash the entire proceedings. 2. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for State. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47895 CRL.P No. 14090 of 2025 Pursuant to the notice issued, respondent No.2/defacto complainant is present before the Court. 3. It is vehemently contented by the learned counsel for petitioner that the complainant is none other than the mother-in-law of the petitioner and there is a serious matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and her husband. The present complaint is a counter blast to the complaint lodged by the petitioner against her husband, mother-in-law and others, registered in Crime No.146/2024 of Nuggehalli Police Station, Hassan, wherein charge sheet is also filed. He contended that to settle a score with the petitioner, making certain false allegations, complaint has been lodged belatedly, after six days, without assigning any reasons. He therefore contended that the proceedings now initiated against the petitioner is nothing but an abuse of process of law. 4. Learned High Court Government Pleader has contended that the reasons for the delay in lodging the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47895 CRL.P No. 14090 of 2025 complaint has been explained in the FIR. There are witnesses who speak about the incident apart from the complainant. The police after conducting investigation have filed charge sheet. He therefore contended that the proceedings cannot be quashed. Accordingly, he sought to dismiss the petition. 5. The respondent No.2 herein lodged a complaint alleging that petitioner's husband Suresh had sent a notice to the petitioner, in the wake of matrimonial discord. In this connection, there was a panchayat held in the village. On 22.06.2025 at about 02.00 p.m., a verbal quarrel took place between the petitioner and the complainant. At that time the petitioner wrongfully restrained the complainant, abused her in filthy language, assaulted her with hands and threatened with dire consequences saying that she will be killed etc. 6. The incident is alleged to have taken place on 22.06.2025. The complaint was lodged on 28.06.2025. No - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47895 CRL.P No. 14090 of 2025 doubt there is delay in lodging the complaint. However, in the complaint it is stated that when the matter was informed to the elders of the village, they tried to convene a panchayat and since the panchayat did not yield any fruitful result, she had to lodge a complaint. 7. It is the contention of the learned counsel for petitioner that the present complaint lodged against the petitioner is a counter blast to the earlier complaint lodged against respondent No.2 and others. I have perused the FIR in Crime No.146/2024 of Nuggehalli Police Station, which was registered on the basis of a complaint lodged by the petitioner. The said incident took place on 14.08.2024. If the 2nd respondent had any intention to lodge a false complaint against the petitioner, she would not have waited for 10 months. It is also pertinent to mention that in respect of the said incident which took place on 14.08.2024, the complaint was lodged on 30.12.2024 i.e., after more than 4 months. The contention of the learned counsel that the entire allegations against the petitioner - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47895 CRL.P No. 14090 of 2025 are false, since there is delay in lodging the complaint has to be outrightedly rejected. Even in the complaint lodged by the petitioner there is delay of more than four months. The charge sheet is already filed. Hence, no grounds are made out to interfere with the proceedings pending against the petitioner. Petition is dismissed. I.A.No.1/2025 is disposed of. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE KLY CT: JL