- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32013 CRL.P No. 7798 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7798 OF 2020 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. MRS. SHIVA KUMARI W/O. LATE KAMESHWAR PRASAD SINGH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS. 2. RAKESH KUMAR SINGH S/O. LATE KAMESHWAR PRASAD SINGH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS. 3. MRS. MAMATA KUMARI D/O. LATE KAMESHWAR PRASAD SINGH, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS PETITIONERS 1 TO 3 ARE RESIDING AT No.42, IMS ROAD NEAR BYE PASS, PS-HUMARI TILAIYA JHUMRI TILIYA, KODARMA JHARKHAND - 825 409. 4. MRS. RACHANA DEVI NOT AS RIPU KUMAR D/O LATE KAMESHWAR PRASAD SINGH, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/ AT No.211, GAUTHAMNAGAR JANTA ROAD, PO G.P.O., PHULWARI PATNA BIHAR - 800 001. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI A N RADHA KRISHNA, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32013 CRL.P No. 7798 of 2020 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY EAST ZONE WOMEN POLICE, BENGALURU, REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS BANGALORE-560 001. 2. SMT. NAMRATA SENGAR W/O. TULESH KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT NO.F-1111, F BLOCK, PLATINUM CITY, PEENYA INDUSTRIAL AREA, BENGALURU-560 022, PERMANENT ADDRESS: D/O. DEENANATH SINGH, OPP. TO HERO HONDA SHOW ROOM, NANUDIH, PATHERDIH, DHANBADH, JHARKHAND - 828 119. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VINAY MAHADEVAIAH, HCGP FOR R1 -STATE SMT. PRIYANKA KUMARI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 20.2.2020 PASSED BY THE VI ACMM, BANGALORE IN C.C.No.3582/2020 ORDER TAKING COGNIZANCE, REGISTERING THE CASE FOR OFFENCES P/U/S 498A, 506 OF IPC AND SEC.3,4 OF D.P ACT AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32013 CRL.P No. 7798 of 2020 ORAL ORDER Petitioner who are arraigned as accused Nos.2 to 5 have filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them in C.C.No.3582/2020 on the file of VI ACMM, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 506 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. 2. In support of the petition, petitioners have contended that respondent No.2 is the wife accused No.1. Their marriage was performed on 24.02.2018. The marriage alliance came through matrimonial site 'Bharat Matrimony'. Some time after the marriage, making false allegations respondent No.2 has filed complaint against all the accused persons including the petitioners. Petitioner Nos.1 to 4 are residents of Jharkhand, whereas petitioner No.5 is a resident of Bihar. They never resided with accused No.1 and respondent No.2. Except the vague and omnibus allegations, there are no material to connect petitioners with the allegations made in the complaint. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32013 CRL.P No. 7798 of 2020 Even if the uncontraverted allegations made are accepted as true, then also there is no material to proceed against the petitioners. Both accused No.1 and respondent No.2 are working and having incompatible temperament and not able to adjust to each other. They are blaming each other and putting the blame on petitioners who are residing separately. Continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of the Court and hence the petition. 3. On the other hand learned counsel representing the respondent No.2 and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 State would submit that based on the complaint filed by respondent No.2 case was registered in Cr.No.131/2019 and after conducting detailed investigation, charge sheet is filed against accused Nos.1 to 5 including the petitioners. The charge sheet reveal that accused Nos.2 to 5 are the mother, brother and sisters of accused No.1. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32013 CRL.P No. 7798 of 2020 3.1 The marriage of accused No.1 and respondent No.2 was performed at Jharkhand on 24.02.2018. At the time of marriage, accused persons demanded dowry in sum of Rs.15 lakhs. Accordingly marriage was performed paying Rs.15 lakhs in cash, gold ornaments worth Rs.7.5 lakhs. Even the gifts received by respondent No.2 were also given to them. On the first day itself, the accused persons took away all the gold ornaments. When questioned, they claimed that the gold ornaments belong to them and she should live like a slave. 3.2 After the marriage, when respondent No.2 shifted to the matrimonial home at Bengaluru, all the accused persons harassed and ill treated her demanding further sum of Rs.5 lakhs. Even though the said amount was paid by father of respondent No.2, the harassment did not stop. Unable to bare the harassment, respondent No.2 left the matrimonial home and shifted to a PG. After conducting detailed investigation, charge sheet is filed. It makes out a strong prima facie case. The allegations are - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32013 CRL.P No. 7798 of 2020 required to be established in a full fledged trial and pray to dismiss the petition. 4. Heard arguments and perused the record. 5. Thus, petitioners who are the mother, brother and sisters of accused No.1 and who arraigned as accused Nos.2 to 5, seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings, contending that they are living separately from accused No.1 and respondent No.2. There are no specific allegations against them and based on omnibus allegations in the complaint, continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of the Court. 6. Though the respondent No.2 is originally hailing from Jharkhand, after the marriage she is living with accused No.1 at Bengaluru. As evident from their addresses, petitioner Nos.2 to 4 are residing at Jharkhand and petitioner No.5 is a resident of Bihar. They are not living with accused No.1 and respondent No.2. Except the omnibus allegations, there are no specific averments - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32013 CRL.P No. 7798 of 2020 regarding the demand of dowry. Though after conducting detailed investigation, charge sheet is filed alleging that the petitioners have forcibly taken the gold ornaments from respondent No.2, admittedly, no recovery of the said ornaments are made. 7. In the complaint, the respondent No.2 has alleged that accused No.1 is suffering from certain ailment and the said fact was concealed from her and on searching in the internet, she came to know that the medicine taken by him is in respect of organ transplant. Accused No.1 was also not helping her in household work. It appears the grievance of respondent No.2 is against accused No.1 and unnecessarily she has roped in the petitioners who are admittedly living separately. In the absence of prima facie material to proceed against the petitioners, continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of the Court and as such it is liable to be quashed and accordingly, the following: - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32013 CRL.P No. 7798 of 2020 ORDER (i) Petition filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 5 under Section 482 Cr.P.C is hereby allowed. (ii) The criminal proceedings in C.C.No.3582/2020 on the file of VI ACMM, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 506 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, is hereby quashed so far as accused Nos.2 to 5 are concerned. (ii) 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.: 53 CT.SM