- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45145 CRL.P No. 3811 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3811 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SUDHA W/O. K. THIRUMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT NO.82, 6TH B CROSS, DODDANEKUMDI EXTENSION, CHINNAPANAHALLI, BANGALORE - 560 037 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. B. GNANAMBAL W/O K. THIRUMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS R/AT NO. 6, D-10, 2ND FLOOR, WATCH FACTORY COLONY, JALAHALLI POST, BANGALORE - 560 013 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SUBRAMANI M., ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 (FILED U/S.528 BNSS) CR.P.C PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PETITION AND QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN C.C.NO.10986/2014 (PCR NO.24211/2013) FOR THE OFFENCE Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45145 CRL.P No. 3811 of 2025 P/US/ 494,496,497,506-B OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ACJM BENGLAURU. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 2. The alleged second wife is before this court in this petition preferred under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 seeking to quash the entire proceedings pending against her in C.C.No.10986/2014 on the file of the Court of VIII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bangalore. 3. The matter arises out of a private complaint filed by the second respondent, namely the first wife of accused No.1. It is alleged that during the subsistence of her marriage with accused No.1, he has contracted the second marriage with the petitioner / accused No.2. It is - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45145 CRL.P No. 3811 of 2025 further alleged that in spite of having knowledge of the first marriage of accused No.1, accused No.2 married him and she has also threatened the complainant with dire consequences, posing threat to her life, if she interfered with her married life. 4. It is alleged that accused No.2, though she was very well aware that accused No. 1 was earlier married to the complainant, got married accused No. 1 and when the complainant approached accused No.2 and requested her to give up the relationship and told her that she is the legally wedded wife of accused No.1, the accused, threatened the complainant with dire consequences posing threat to her life etc. 5. It is alleged that the accused persons on 19.11.2013 at about 08.00 p.m. came to the house of the complainant and threatened the complainant not to interfere with their married life etc. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45145 CRL.P No. 3811 of 2025 6. On presentation of the complaint, the learned Magistrate recorded the sworn statement of the complainant and passed an order on 15.04.2014 directing registration of the case against both accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offence punishable under Section 494 and 506 of IPC and issue summons to them. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the following decisions: i) 'Manik Tamenja And Another V/s. State of Karnataka and Another reported in (2015) 7 SCC 423 passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court. ii) Sri. Manjunath B. @ Sippe Manjunath and others passed V/s State and Another by the High Court of Karnataka in Crl.P.No.5563/2018 iii) Smt. Revathi V/s. Smt. Netravathi passed by the High Court of Karnataka in Crl.P.No.5678/2018 to contend that Section 494 of IPC will be attracted to a person who marries during the subsistence and the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45145 CRL.P No. 3811 of 2025 lifetime of the earlier spouse and the alleged second wife cannot be prosecuted under the said Section. 8. Section 494 of IPC reads as under:- "Section 494. Marrying again during life-time of husband or wife. - Whoever, having a husband or wife living, marries in any case in which such marriage is void by reason of its taking place during the life of such husband or wife, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine. Exception.—This section does not extend to any person whose marriage with such husband or wife has been declared void by a Court of competent jurisdiction, nor to any person who contracts a marriage during the life of a former husband or wife, if such husband or wife, at the time of the subsequent marriage, shall have been continually absent from such person for the space of seven years, and shall not have been heard of by such person as being alive within that time provided the person contracting such subsequent marriage shall, before such marriage takes place, inform the person with whom such marriage is contracted of the real state of facts so far as the same are within his or her knowledge." - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45145 CRL.P No. 3811 of 2025 9. In the decisions noted supra it has been categorically held that a person who can be prosecuted under Section 494 IPC is the erring husband or wife who marries again during the lifetime of his or her spouse and during the subsistence of the marriage. 10. The above position of law is not disputed by the learned counsel for the respondent. 11. In the present case, admittedly in so far as the petitioner is concerned, she being the alleged second wife, cannot be prosecuted under Section 494 of IPC, as it is accused No.1 who has taken the second wife during the subsistence of his marriage with the complainant. 12. The learned counsel for respondent would contend that there are specific allegations in the complaint against the petitioner that she along with accused No.1 has threatened the complainant and therefore, the ingredients of Section 506 are attracted. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45145 CRL.P No. 3811 of 2025 13. The learned Magistrate while directing to register the case against accused Nos.1 and 2 has observed that the complainant has clearly stated that on 19.11.2013 at about 08.00 p.m. the accused came to her house and threatened her with dire consequences and therefore, proceeded to register the case even under Section 506 of IPC. 14. A careful perusal of the complaint averments at paragraph No.12 reveals that vague allegations have been made against accused No.2, alleging that she threatened the complainant, including threat to her life. It is alleged, on 19.11.2013 at about 08.00 p.m. the accused came to the house of the complainant and threatened her not to interfere in their married life etc. 15. The above allegation alone is not sufficient to attract the ingredients of Section 506 of IPC, so as to implicate the petitioner, alleged second wife as an accused in the case. It is not stated as to what was the manner of the life threat given by the petitioner to the complainant. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45145 CRL.P No. 3811 of 2025 The Hon'ble Apex Court in 'Manik Taneja and Another versus State of Karnataka and Another' reported in (2015) 7 SCC 423 has held that mere expression of any words without any intention to cause alarm would not be sufficient to bring in the application of this section of the provision. There is no material whatsoever on record to show that the intention of the petitioner was to cause alarm to the complainant. 16. From the facts and circumstances of the case, even if the allegations are to be accepted, it can be seen that there was no intention on the part of the petitioner to cause any life threat to the complainant. The continuation of the proceedings against the petitioner is an abuse of process of law. Hence the petition succeeds. Accordingly in following:- ORDER i) Petition is allowed. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45145 CRL.P No. 3811 of 2025 ii) The proceedings in C.C.No.10986/2014 on the file of the VIII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bangalore, insofar as the petitioner / accused No.2 is concerned, are quashed. iii) The proceedings shall continue as against accused No.1. iv) It is submitted by the learned counsel for respondent no. 2 that the matter is pending before the trial court since 2014, the trial court is therefore, directed to expedite the trial. IA No. 2 of 25 is dismissed. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE LDC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34