- 1 - CRL.P No.103368 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI CRIMINAL PETITION NO.103368 OF 2024 BETWEEN: 1. MADHAVI BUSETTY WIFE OF SRI SURESH AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO.21/34/2, SAILAJA NILAYAM, SKD COLONY, 4TH ROAD, ADONI (TQ.) KURNOOL, ANDHRA PRADESH-518101. 2 . SRI SUESH BUSETTY S/O. PRAHALADAIAH, HOUSE NO.21/34/2, SAILAJA NILAYAM, SKD COLONY, 4TH ROAD, ADONI (TQ) KURNOOL, ANDHRA PRADESH-518101. 3 . SRIKANT BUSETTY SON OF SRI SURESH AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO.21/34/2, SAILAJA NILAYAM, SKD COLONY, 4TH ROAD, ADONI (TQ) KURNOOL, ANDHRA PRADESH-518101, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT WASHINGTON, UNITED STATE OF AMERICA MOBILE+16825595917. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI SURESH KUMAR POTTURI AND SRI MANORANJAN KUMAR GUPTA, ADVOCATES) - 2 - CRL.P No.103368 of 2024 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, WOMEN PS BALLARI, REP. BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD-580001. 2 . SMT. H. PAVANI SAI, WIFE OF VISHNUKANTH BUSETTY, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, PRESENTLY RESIDING ALONG WITH HER PARENTS, D/O M. RAJA SEKHAR, PLOT NO.24, VISHAL NAGAR, NEAR ANANTHAPUR ROAD, BALLARI, KARNATAKA-583101. …RESPONDENTS (BY PRAVEENA Y.DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP FOR R1; MS. RANJITA G.ALAGAWADI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. (U/S. 528 OF BNSS, 2023) SEEKING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT AND FIR IN CRIME NO.93/2024 DATED 27.06.2024 REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 498-A, 323, 504 R/W SEC. 34 OF IPC BY THE WOMAN POLICE STATION, BALLARI AGAINST THE PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED NO.2 TO 4, ON THE FILE OF 4TH ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) JMFC, COURT, BALLARI AND ETC., THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 12.12.2024, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: - 3 - CRL.P No.103368 of 2024 CORAM: THE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI CAV ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI) Petitioners who are respectively arraigned as accused Nos.3, 2 and 4 have filed this petition under Section 528 of Bharathiya Nagrik Suraksha Samhita with the prayer to quash criminal proceedings initiated against them in Cr.No.93/2024 of Woman police station, Ballari for the offences punishable under sections 498-A, 323, 504 r/w Section 34 of I.P.C. 2. In support of the petition, the petitioners have contented that they are the parents and brother of accused No.1 Vishnukanth Busetty. The marriage of complainant H. Pavani Sai and accused No.1 was performed on 18.10.2019 at Kurnool. After the marriage, complainant never stayed with the petitioners to lead matrimonial life. Directly she went to Dallas and stayed with accused No.1. She only visited petitioners house occasionally for two or three days. The sum and substance of the allegations relates to routine trivial disputes and - 4 - CRL.P No.103368 of 2024 petty matters of a matrimonial life. Unnecessarily petitioners have been roped in on the basis of omnibus allegations. No specific and distinct allegations have been made against the petitioners. None of the petitioners have contributed any specific role in furtherance of the general allegations. In such circumstances, continuation of the prosecution would amount to abuse of process of law. The tenor of the allegations made are to the effect that complainant never got assistance in household work from petitioner No.1 mother-in-law. 3. Initially complainant filed maintenance petition in the month of January 2024. As it was processed slowly and notice could not be served on accused No.1, the complainant has chosen to file complaint, alleging offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC. In the maintenance petition, no allegations are forthcoming which are subsequently included in the complaint and to pressurise accused No.1, the petitioners are roped In. As held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the provisions of Section 498-A IPC are being misused by the complainant. The - 5 - CRL.P No.103368 of 2024 continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner would amount to abuse of process of the court and pray to acquit all of the petitioner and quash the proceedings against the petitioners. 4. In support of his arguments learned counsel for petitioner has relied upon the following decisions: (i) Rajiv Thapar and Ors. Vs. Mada. Lal Kapoor (Rajiv Thapar)1 (ii) Rajesh Sharma and Ors. Vs. State of U.P. and Anr. (Rajesh Sharma)2 (iii) MST.Rehana Begum Vs. State of Assam and Anr. (Rehana Begum)3 (iv) Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar and Ors. (Kahkashan Kausar)4 (v) Achin Gupta Vs. State of Haryana and Anr. (Achin Gupta)5 (vi) Dara Lakshmi Narayana and Ors. Vs. State of Telangana and Anr. (Dara Lakshmi)6 (vii) Yashodeep Bisanrao Vadode Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. (Yashodeep Bisanrao Vadode)7 1 (2013) 3 SCR 52 2 (2017) 9 SCR 529 3 (2022) 17 SCC 722 4 (2022) 1 SCR 558 5 (2024) 6 SCR 129 6 SLP (Crl)No.16239/2024) - 6 - CRL.P No.103368 of 2024 5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2/complainant submits that specific allegations are made against all the accused persons including the petitioners and it requires a thorough investigation to find out the truth. On account of the stay, there is no progress in the investigation and pray to reject the petition. 6. Heard arguments and perused the record. 7. The undisputed facts are that petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are the parents and the petitioner No.3 is the brother of accused No.1 Vishnukanth Busetty. Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are residing at Kurnool and petitioner No.3 is residing at Washington DC. The marriage of complainant and accused No.1 was celebrated on 18.10.2019. 8. Crl.Misc.No.16/2024 is the petition filed by the complainant against accused No.1 claiming maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. This is the first available version of the allegations made by the complainant. As evident from this petition, after one month of the marriage, 7 SLP (Crl)No.8245/2023 - 7 - CRL.P No.103368 of 2024 accused No.1 left to USA on 18.11.2019. Complainant followed him on 26.01.2020 and as per the averments of this petition, she lead happy married life for six months. After she became pregnant, the mother-in-law i.e., petitioner No.1 went to USA on 12.10.2020, in all probability to see that there is some assistance and help to the complainant. She has given birth to a son on 12.12.2020. It appears as issue of citizenship was involved she could not go to India, but the complainant has alleged that she was not allowed to go to India. 9. On 29.06.2021, complainant along with the child and petitioner No.1 has returned to India. On 25.10.2021, naming ceremony of the child was held. It is stated in the petition that at the time of the function, she was paid ₹1,00,000/- and the complainant was paid ₹50,000 which appears to be a gift for the occasion. It is alleged that respondent and his mother used to harass and torture petitioner No.1 to stop breastfeeding the child which appears to be for the reason that she was supposed to go alone to USA, leaving the child behind and therefore - 8 - CRL.P No.103368 of 2024 they wanted to see that the child is accustomed to bottle feeding. The main allegation made in the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C is that at USA, petitioner No.1 was not assisting the complainant in the household work. It appears in India, the complainant was not accustomed to doing household work and as in America, they could not engage the services of a maid, she was forced to do the household work and this was the main issue. 10. Complainant has also alleged that her husband was not happy about the fact that she was not going for work. It appears the child was left behind to enable the complainant to get some job. It is stated that on 12.01.2023, the complainant came to India to see her child, which appears to be an unscheduled visit and therefore accused No.1 put a condition that if she wants to come back, she should bear her own expenses. Hence, the complainant has chosen to file the maintenance petition alleging that the accused No.1 has neglected to maintain her and her son. - 9 - CRL.P No.103368 of 2024 11. In the petition under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., absolutely there are no allegations against petitioner Nos. 2 and 3. Even the allegations against the accused No.1 and petitioner No.1 appears to be on account of adjustment issues between the complainant and accused No.1 and small skirmishes and squabbles between the newly wedding. 12. Learned counsel appearing for complainant/respondent No.2 has produced copy of complaint dated 10.06.2024 given by her, addressed to the Inspector-General of Police and Superintendent of Police, Ballari against accused No.1, petitioners and father of petitioner No.3, who appears to be an octogenarian. In this complaint, she has stated that while staying at USA, she was ill-treated, abused, beaten and punished. When she was at Adhoni, accused Nos.2 to 5, which includes the grandfather of accused No.1 tried to burn her by pouring kerosene and setting her on fire. She has also alleged that the accused No.1 is a womaniser and was sadistic in nature. Petitioner Nos.2 and 4 used to instigate accused - 10 - CRL.P No.103368 of 2024 No.1 to kill her and many times they were not providing daily essentials. It is also alleged that on 12.01.2023, she beaten blue and black and thrown out of the matrimonial home and her father took her back to Ballari. All her gold Jewels and silver articles were taken away by the accused persons. There was also demand for additional dowry of five lakhs. This typed complaint runs into eight pages. It is not clear what happened to this complaint, whether any action is taken on the basis of this complaint. 13. Again, the complainant has chosen the file a complaint dated 27.06.2024, which is a handwritten complaint consisting of two pages. It is not clear whether it is in the handwriting of the complainant. On the basis of this complaint, the present case is registered against Nos.1 to 4, including the petitioners. In this complaint, she has stated that after the marriage for a period of one month, she stayed in the matrimonial home at Adhoni and she was not taken good care of by in-laws, she was teased that she is not a proper match to accused No.1 and she has no place in their house and accused No.1 used to tell her that - 11 - CRL.P No.103368 of 2024 he would marry a suitable girl. Accused Nos.3 and 4 were always abusing and harassing her. Accused No.2 was telling her to divorce his son and go back to her maternal home. 14. It is alleged that a Panchayat was held without any success. Accused No.1 used to assault her and complainant and her son were driven out of their house. Accused Nos.1 and 4 used to demand that in order to go to America, she should give a Bond stating that if she die, she alone would be responsible. In this complaint, the allegations made in the first complaint which is addressed to the IGP and Superintendent of Police are not forthcoming. Similarly, in the petition filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C, the details which are forthcoming in two complaints are not forthcoming. 15. There are lot of improvements in the complaint dated 10.06.2024, which is addressed to the IGP and Superintendent of Police, which appears to be the handiwork of legally trained person to improve the case of the prosecution. In a desperate attempt to strengthen her - 12 - CRL.P No.103368 of 2024 case for maintenance, these allegations appears to have been made as an afterthought. While so doing, the complainant has not even spared the grandfather of accused No.1, who is in his advanced age. There is also no explanation as to the result of the complaint dated 10.06.2024. These complaints against the petitioners appears to be an arm twisting attempt made to force accused No.1 to yield to the demands of complainant. In the light of the ratio in the decisions relied upon by the petitioners, this Court is of the considered opinion that continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioners would amount to abuse of the process of the court. It is a fit case to quash the criminal proceedings against the petitioners, and accordingly, the following: ORDER (i) Petition filed by petitioners/accused Nos.3, 2 and 4 under Section 528 of BNSS is hereby allowed. (ii) The criminal proceedings initiated against petitioners in Cr.No.93/2024 of Ballari - 13 - CRL.P No.103368 of 2024 Woman PS for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 r/w Section 34 of I.P.C is hereby quashed. SD/- (J.M.KHAZI) JUDGE RR CT: UMD