- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33967 CRL.P No. 8866 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8866 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SHEETAL K N W/O H S ARAVIND, D/O K S NARASIMHA BABU, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, 2. KUM. RUTHIKA D/O H.S. ARAVIND AND K N SHEETAL AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS, MINOR REP BY HER NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER THE 1ST PETITIONER BOTH ARE R/AT NO.1623, 1ST FLOOR, 5TH B CROSS, 17TH MAIN, BANASHANKARI 1ST STAGE, 2ND BLOCK, BENGALURU-560 050. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MANJUNATH M.R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SOUTH WOMEN P S BENGALURU REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001. Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33967 CRL.P No. 8866 of 2025 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HASSAN WOMEN P.S. HASSAN REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001. 3. ARAVIND H S S/O SATYANARAYAN SETTY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, 4. SATYANARAYAN SETTY H S S/O NOT KNOWN, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/AT NO.32, HIGH NANDITHASHVA NILAYA, 1ST MAIN, 2ND CROSS, KUVEMPUNAGARA, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RANGASWAMY.R, HCGP FOR R1 AND R2; R3 AND R4 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 447 OF BNSS PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER BEARING NO. APARADHA- 4/KADATHA.VARGAVANE/02/2024 DATED 29.04.2025 PASSED BY S.P SOUTH WOMEN P.S. BENGALURU SOUTH IN CR.NO.8/2025, AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33967 CRL.P No. 8866 of 2025 ORAL ORDER Petitioners are seeking to transfer the criminal case registered against respondent Nos.3 and 4 in Crime No.38/2025 of Hassan Women Police Station, pending on the file of 7th Additional Civil Judge, (Junior Division) and JMFC Court, Hassan District, and to restore the same to original Crime No.8/2025 of South Women Police Station, Bengaluru. 2. Petitioners are the wife and minor daughter of respondent No.3. Respondent No.4 is the father of respondent No.3. 3. Crime No.8/2025 of South Women Police Station, Bengaluru City, was registered against them for the offence Punishable under Section 498A, 323, 504 of IPC, Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The said case was transferred to - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33967 CRL.P No. 8866 of 2025 Hassan Women Police Station and numbered as Crime No.38/2025. 4. It is contended by the petitioners' counsel that initially, case was registered in Bengaluru, as the petitioners are the residents of Bengaluru. The marriage and offence also took place in Bengaluru and therefore, the case has to be transferred to the Court in Bengaluru. It is further contended that petitioners being residents of Bengaluru and the Second petitioner being a minor and studying in Bengaluru, will find it difficult to travel to Hassan to attend the case and therefore, in order to safeguard them both financially and mentally, case be transferred from Hassan to Bengaluru, where the complaint was initially lodged and case was registered. 5. Learned counsel has relied on a judgment of the Apex Court reported in (2019) 5 SCC 384 in the case of RUPALI DEVI V/s. STATE OF UTTARPRADESH AND OTHERS. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33967 CRL.P No. 8866 of 2025 6. First petitioner, wife of respondent No.3 lodged a complaint on 30.01.2025, against her husband and father in law alleging dowry harassment etc., which was registered in Crime No.8/2025 of South Women Police Station, Bengaluru City. As per complaint averments, marriage between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.3, took place in Bengaluru on 18.05.2022. Allegations are of dowry harassment etc., including physical and mental torture. Case was transferred from Bengaluru South Women Police Station to Hassan Women Police Station, Hassan and registered in Crime No.38/2025 as the accused were residents of Hassan and offence was also committed within the said Jurisdiction. 7. In Rupalidevi’s case, (supra) the Apex Court has held that Section 178 creates an exception to the “ordinary rule” engrafted in Section 177 by permitting the courts in another local area where the offence is partly committed to take congnizance - Also if the offence committed in one local area continues in another local - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33967 CRL.P No. 8866 of 2025 area, the courts in the latter place would be competent to take congnizance of the matter-under Section 179, if by reason of the consequences emanating from a criminal act an offence is occasioned in another jurisdiction, the court in that jurisdiction would also be competent to take congnizance-Thus if an offence is committed partly in once place and partly in another; or if the offence is a continuing offence or where the consequences of a criminal act result in an offence being committed at another place, the exception to the “ordinary rule” would be attracted and the courts within whose jurisdiction the criminal act is committed will cease to have exclusive jurisdiction to try the offence. Further held that, adverse effects on mental health in parental home or other place of shelter though on account of acts committed in matrimonial home would amount to commission of cruelty within the meaning of Section 498-A IPC at parental home or such other place-Consequences of cruelty committed at matrimonial home result in repeated - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33967 CRL.P No. 8866 of 2025 offences being committed at parental home or such other place of shelter. Hence, the courts at the place where wife takes shelter after leaving or being driven away from matrimonial home on account of acts of cruelty committed by husband or his relatives, would, dependent on factual situation, also have jurisdiction to entertain a complaint alleging commission of offences under Section 498-A IPC. 8. In light of the above decision, there is no dispute that the courts within whose jurisdiction, the complainant resides has jurisdiction to try the case. However, in the present case, the investigation is at the threshold, which is being conducted by Hassan Women Police Station, Hassan. If the investigation is completed and a final report is filed, petitioners can address their grievance regarding transfer of the case. As of now, it is too premature to issue a direction as prayed. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33967 CRL.P No. 8866 of 2025 9. With the above observation, petition is dismissed. Pending IAs are disposed of. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE LDC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22