- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33519 CRL.P No. 397 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 397 OF 2025 BETWEEN: ASHISH SRIVASTAVA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, S/O. ANAND BEHARI SRIVASTAVA, R/AT, E-606, PURVA SEASONS APARTMENT, KAGADASPURA ROAD, C.V RAMAN NGAR, BENGALURU- 560 093. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. M. R. C. MANOHAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY WHITEFIELD WOMEN P.S, BENGALURU CITY, REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, 560 001. 2. SMT. PRAGYA SRIVASTAVA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, W/O, ASHISH SRIVASTAVA, R/AT FLAT NO.111, APOORVA LAKSIDE APARTMENT, BASAVANAGAR, HAL, BENGALURU - 560 037. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ANOOP KUMAR, HCGP FOR R1; KUMARI. V.MRUDULA, ADVOCATE FOR R2) Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33519 CRL.P No. 397 of 2025 THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED AGAINST HIM IN C.C NO. 74430/2024 (CRIME NO. 39/2024) REGISTERED BY THE WHITEFIELD WOMAN P.S, BENGALURU, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 85, 351(2) AND 126 OF THE BNS, 2023 AND THE CASE IS PRESENTLY PENDING ON THE FILES HON'BLE 29TH ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioner – husband seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings pending in C.C. No.74430/2024, arising out of Crime No.39/2024 registered by the Whitefield Women Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 351(2) and 126 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The case of the prosecution is that respondent No.2, who is the wife of the petitioner, has filed a petition for divorce on 08.04.2024 at Jabalpur, which has since been transferred to Bengaluru. The complainant has alleged that on several occasions, the petitioner created - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33519 CRL.P No. 397 of 2025 disturbances at their son’s school and attempted to forcibly take him away. Her primary grievance is that despite she having intimated the school authorities through a written notice that only in case of medical emergency the petitioner could pick up their son, the petitioner has interfered in violation of the said arrangement. It is further alleged that the petitioner has on multiple occasions obstructed respondent No.2 on her way to office and to the child’s school, threatened her on the road and shouted near her apartment thereby causing her humiliation and defamation. 3. Based on this complaint, Crime No.39/2024 came to be registered. Respondent No.2 thereafter lodged an additional complaint before the Investigating Officer alleging that on 10.08.2024, the petitioner forcibly took away the child despite her protest and carried him to a Pizza Hut outlet. Compelled to accompany her son, respondent No.2 states that during their stay at the said place the petitioner continuously harassed her by alleging - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33519 CRL.P No. 397 of 2025 that she had ruined his life, thereby subjecting her to mental agony and distress. 4. After investigation, the jurisdictional police have filed a charge sheet. The petitioner – husband has approached this Court seeking quashing of the proceedings contending that even if the allegations in the complaint dated 29.07.2024 and the subsequent complaint dated 12.08.2024 are taken at their face value, the same do not disclose the commission of any offence. It is urged that the continuation of the proceedings would amount to an abuse of process of law and cause irreparable prejudice to the petitioner, who is serving as a Senior Scientist in the DRDO and whose reputation would be gravely harmed. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of the above grounds, has placed reliance on several judgments to contend that the allegations are purely matrimonial in nature and do not constitute any criminal - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33519 CRL.P No. 397 of 2025 offence, thereby warranting interference under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 6. Per-contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 – de-facto complainant has argued that there is sufficient material on record to proceed against the petitioner and therefore, the present petition deserves to be dismissed. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Renuka v. State of Karnataka and Another1 to emphasize the limitations on the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. 7. Learned HCGP, adopting the arguments of respondent No.2, has further contended that the materials collected during investigation prima-facie disclose the involvement of the petitioner and warrant a full-fledged trial. It is submitted that this Court should not, at this stage, interdict the prosecution by quashing the proceedings. 1 2025 SCC OnLine SC 970 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33519 CRL.P No. 397 of 2025 8. Having heard the learned counsels on both sides, this Court has carefully examined the complaint lodged by respondent No.2 on 29.07.2024 and the additional complaint filed on 12.08.2024. Before proceeding to consider whether the allegations therein warrant prosecution, this Court deems it appropriate to extract the relevant portions of both complaints. Since the initial complaint is concise in nature, the entire contents are reproduced herein below: "To, The Police Subinspector Women Police Station Whitefield Division Mahadevpura Bangalore From: Pragya Srivastava D/o O.B Khare Flat no: 111, Apoorva lakeside apartment Basavanagar, Bangalore-560037 Phone No: 9686080583, 9425862781 Subject: Complaint against husband Mr. Ashish Srivastava, Mobile no.7760847589 I am Pragya Srivastava, aged 39 years currently employed as a scientist at ISRO in Bangalore. I was married to Mr. Ashish Srivastava in accordance with Hindu rites on 01-12-2010. Mr Ashish is employed as a scientist at CAIR, DRDO. We have a son, Master Prakhar Srivastava, who is currently 6 years. I have suffered mental, emotional and physical cruelty at the hands of my husband and his parents at multiple occasions. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33519 CRL.P No. 397 of 2025 I have applied for divorce case against my husband on 8th April 2024 at Jabalpur (M.P), which is my hometown. Currently I am staying at my local address in Bangalore mentioned above with my son and elderly parents. On multiple occasions my husband caused disturbance at my son's school and tried to forcefully pick him. Even though in school we have submitted in written that he is allowed to pick in case of medical emergency. It is creating mental trauma for my son. At multiple occasions he tried to stop me on the way to office and son's school and my home. He threatened me on the road and also shouted near my apartment creating scene and trying to defame us on 11th July. He entered in my apartment premises and took photographs of my parking. On the late night of 26th July he again came near to apartment and shouted name of my son loudly. My son got afraid and started crying. He continues to contact my relatives, friends and colleagues spreading defamatory statements. Despite my efforts his abusive behaviour persists, making it unsafe for us to live here. My parents and I live in constant fear for our lives. I kindly request you to ensure our safety and provide protection from him and also give us justice. Thank you Signature" 9. This Court also deems it fit to extract the additional complaint lodged by respondent No.2 on 12.08.2024. "To The Police Subinspector Women Police Station, Whitefield devision, Mahadevpura Bangalore - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33519 CRL.P No. 397 of 2025 From:- Pragya Srevastava D/o O.B.Khare Flat No.111, Apoorva lakeside apartments Basavanagar, Bangalore-560037 Phone no 9686080583/9425862781 Email id - pragyaakhare@gmail.com caste - Hindu kayasth Subject:- Complaint against husband Mr.Ashish Srevastava in continuation of FIR no.39/2024 further statement Respected Sir, I am writing to bring to your attention a serious incident that occurred on 10th August 2024. On the aforementioned date at around 5:20pm, while I was riding Scooty with my son near our home Mr.Ashish recklessly followed us on his scooty. He overtook us forcing me to stop abruptly. Ignoring my pleas Mr. Ashish forcibly took my son from my scooty onto his own scooty and started riding ahead on the name of taking him to mall. He stopped him, then he argued for the same in front of Sherwood galleria. Then he rode ahead and stopped near Pizza Hut and took my son inside. To avoid creating a scene in front of my son, I reluctantly sat with them until the meal got over. During this time Mr.Ashish continuously harassed me ruining our home and running away from home and spoling his life. His words caused me immense mental agony and distress. Almost after on hour Mr. Ashish promised my son that he would buy him new shoes and assured me that he would drop him off by 7:30pm. However he didn't keep his words when I insisted to leave our son with me he claimed that I have no legal right to stop him and despite my direct request he angrily shouted on me and drove with my son, concerned for my son's safety, not to follow them. I repeatedly called Mr.Ashish urging him to bring our son back to my home, but instead of buying shoes, he took him to his home at Purva Seasons. Around 9pm, I warned Mr. Ashish that I would contact the police if he didn't return our son immediately. He eventually arrived at Sherwood Galleria with his parents around 10pm. His parents created a scene, accusing me of having questionable character and making remarks about my modesty, my father in law followed me to my apartment, attempting to barge in. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33519 CRL.P No. 397 of 2025 Given there events, I humbly request your immediate Intervention to protect my son and me from Mr. Ashish and his parents. We are living in constant fear for our lives. I urge you to take appropriate action against Mr.Ashish and his parents. Rd/- Date: 12.08.24 Thank you Sd/- (Pragya Srivastava) Sd/- Police Sub-Inspector Women Police Station Whitefield Division" 10. The records placed before this Court indicate that the petitioner is presently serving as a Senior Scientist in the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), while respondent No.2 – wife is employed as a Scientist in the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO). Both spouses are, therefore, highly qualified individuals holding responsible positions in organisations of national importance. 11. It is further borne out from the records that the matrimonial relationship between the parties has already reached a stage of irretrievable breakdown. Respondent No.2 has instituted proceedings for dissolution of marriage, which are pending in RCS H.M.No.413/2024. On the other hand, the - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33519 CRL.P No. 397 of 2025 petitioner has filed a petition seeking restitution of conjugal rights in M.C.No.4504/2024, which is also pending adjudication. Apart from these, the petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of the Family Court by filing G & WC No.258/2024 under Sections 7, 17 and 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 seeking visitation rights in respect of his minor son. Thus, it is clear that multiple proceedings are pending before the Family Court and the custody as well as visitation rights of the minor child are issues directly within its domain. 12. Having regard to these significant details, this Court has meticulously examined the complaints lodged by respondent No.2. On a close reading of the complaint dated 29.07.2024 and the subsequent complaint dated 12.08.2024, what emerges is that the allegations essentially pertain to matrimonial discord and the petitioner’s attempts to interact with his minor son, rather than conduct that can be categorised as cruelty or harassment in the strict sense of the penal law. In this regard, the observations of the Hon’ble - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33519 CRL.P No. 397 of 2025 Supreme Court in Achin Gupta vs. State of Haryana and Another2 squarely apply, wherein the Apex Court cautioned against criminalising matrimonial disputes when the allegations do not disclose the basic ingredients of the offences alleged. 13. The first complaint dated 29.07.2024 makes general, omnibus and somewhat ambiguous allegations against the petitioner. The primary grievance is that the petitioner has been causing disturbances at the child’s school and attempting to forcibly pick him up despite a written communication to the school authorities that only the mother is authorised to do so. It is further alleged that he obstructed respondent No.2 on her way to office and school, threatened her in public places, and created scenes near her apartment. Similarly, the additional complaint dated 12.08.2024 narrates an incident where the petitioner allegedly compelled the child to accompany him to a Pizza Hut outlet and subsequently delayed returning the child to the respondent. Even if these 2 (2025) SCC 756 - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33519 CRL.P No. 397 of 2025 allegations are accepted at their face value, they depict an underlying matrimonial discord centred around access to the child rather than conduct amounting to cruelty or other penal offences. 14. It is well settled that the police machinery should not be invoked for every trivial disagreement or discord between estranged spouses. The Hon’ble Apex Court as well as this Court have time and again cautioned against converting ordinary matrimonial skirmishes into criminal cases, particularly when the allegations lack the necessary particulars that constitute the ingredients of the offences alleged. A careful reading of both complaints makes it evident that the essential ingredients which would attract an offence under Section 498A IPC (now BNS equivalent) or related provisions are conspicuously absent. The complaints, at best, disclose that the petitioner is making efforts to meet or interact with his son, which might have caused annoyance or distress to respondent No.2, but such conduct cannot be elevated to the level of criminality. - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33519 CRL.P No. 397 of 2025 15. While this Court is mindful of the paramount role of a mother in the upbringing of a child, it is equally conscious of the fact that a father cannot be deprived of his natural and legal right to have access to his child. The welfare of the minor child demands that he must not be alienated from either parent, for the love and care of both father and mother are equally vital to his balanced development. Though the Family Court, in its wisdom, has already passed orders granting visitation rights to the petitioner, emotions often overshadow legal directions in matrimonial conflicts. If respondent No.2 is genuinely aggrieved by the petitioner’s alleged interference during school hours or otherwise, the appropriate recourse available to her is to seek modification or stricter enforcement of visitation terms before the Family Court, rather than resorting to criminal prosecution. 16. In the considered view of this Court, the present case falls within the category of exceptions where continuance of criminal proceedings would amount to sheer abuse of the process of law. Both parties are independent, - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33519 CRL.P No. 397 of 2025 well-educated and self-reliant individuals, capable of protecting their interests before the competent Family Court. The allegations that the petitioner attempted to take his son to a Pizza Hut or promised to buy him shoes, even if true, do not constitute acts of cruelty or harassment so as to attract penal consequences. Rather, such acts reflect his desire to maintain contact with his son, albeit contrary to the wishes of respondent No.2. Allowing the prosecution to continue in these circumstances would not only subject the petitioner, who holds a responsible position in a reputed organisation, to unnecessary humiliation but would also defeat the very object of justice by criminalising what is essentially a civil and matrimonial dispute. 17. On an overall reading of the two complaints, this Court is satisfied that even if the allegations therein are accepted in their entirety, they do not disclose the commission of the offences alleged. The tenor and language of the complaints indicate exaggeration, primarily arising out of the ongoing matrimonial discord and the petitioner’s efforts - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33519 CRL.P No. 397 of 2025 to access his child contrary to respondent No.2’s wishes. With several matrimonial proceedings already pending before the competent Family Court, continuation of the present prosecution would only aggravate acrimony between the parties. Hence, in the larger interest of justice and to prevent abuse of the process of law, this Court is constrained to exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 18. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following; ORDER (i) The petition is allowed. (ii) The entire proceedings in C.C.No.74430/2024 arising out of the Crime No.39/2024 registered by the Whitefield Woman Police Station, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 351(2) and 126 of the BNS, 2023 pending on the file of the - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33519 CRL.P No. 397 of 2025 29th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru are hereby quashed. I.A.No.2/2025 is also disposed off accordingly. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7