- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1095 CRL.P No. 103884 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.103884 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SHAMALA HABIB, W/O. HARISH HABIB, AGE. 46 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE, R/O. # PLOT NO.47, 8TH CROSS, T2-3RD FLOOR, KALBURAGI HARMONY APARTMENT, VIJAYANAGAR, HUBBALLI-580032. 2. SMT. SAVITA SHRINIVAS PATTAN W/O. SHRINIVAS PATTAN, AGE. 44 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE, R/O. G-4, SHREYAS EXOTICA APARTMENT, NEAR NEW SUB-JAIL, VISHWESHWAR NAGAR, VIJAYANAGAR, HUBBALLI-580032. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SACHIN C. ANGADI AND SRI. VINAYAK MEGUNDI, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH HUBBALLI DHARWAD CITY WOMEN P.S., HUBBALLI, REP. BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD-580002. 2. SMT. NIKITA SAINATH PAWAR W/O. SAINATH PAWAR, AGE. 35 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE, R/AT HOUSE NO.22, ADYAPAKANAGAR, BEHIND VISHWANATHA, KALYANAMANTAPA, HUBBALLI-580032. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, AGA FOR R1 SRI. GOURI SHANKAR MOT, ADVOCATE FOR R2) B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.01.25 12:19:38 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1095 CRL.P No. 103884 of 2024 THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (U/S. 528 OF BNSS, 2023) SEEKING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT AND FIR IN CRIME NO.88/2024 CRIME REGISTERED BY THE HUBLI DHARWAD CITY WOMEN PS, HUBBALLI FOR OFFENCE P/U/SEC. 115(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 85 OF BNS, 2023 FILE PENDING BEFORE THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HUBBALLI DHARWAD CITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioners, accused Nos.3 and 4, challenge the registration of the First Information Report (FIR) for offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352, and 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The second respondent lodged the FIR, alleging that her marriage with accused No.1 was solemnized on 28.04.2008, and they have three children from the said wedlock. Accused No.2 is alleged to be the mother-in-law, while accused Nos.3 and 4 are the sisters-in-law. It is further alleged that accused Nos.3 and 4 subjected the complainant to physical and mental cruelty. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1- State, and the learned counsel for respondent No.2-complainant. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners are the sisters-in-law who reside separately from the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1095 CRL.P No. 103884 of 2024 complainant. He submits that, apart from vague and general allegations, no specific allegations of cruelty—either physical or mental—have been made against the petitioners. He further submits that the dispute stems from marital discord between accused No.1 and respondent No.2. 5. In response, the learned counsel for respondent No.2 argues that specific overt acts are attributed to the petitioners, alleging they instigated accused No.1 to subject the complainant to cruelty. He submits that the allegations in the complaint disclose cognizable offences, and their veracity can only be established during the investigation. The learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1 supports the submissions of the complainant’s counsel. 6. The arguments advanced by the respective counsel have been carefully considered. 7. The marriage between the second respondent and accused No.1 was solemnized on 28.04.2008, and they have three children. The complaint admits that accused Nos.3 and 4 reside separately. It is alleged that they frequently visited the matrimonial home, criticized the complainant as unfit for the role of a wife, and instigated accused No.1 to harass the complainant. However, apart from these general and omnibus allegations, there are no specific allegations indicating that the petitioners consistently subjected the complainant to physical or mental cruelty. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1095 CRL.P No. 103884 of 2024 8. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Kahkashan Kausar Alias Sonam and Others v. State of Bihar and Others, observed: i) “This Court has repeatedly expressed concern over the misuse of Section 498-A of IPC and the tendency to implicate the husband’s relatives without proper analysis of the long-term ramifications of such cases. False implications based on vague allegations during matrimonial disputes, if unchecked, would lead to the misuse of the legal process. Courts must, therefore, refrain from proceeding against relatives of the husband where no prima facie case is made out against them.” ii) “General and omnibus allegations, without specific roles attributed to individual accused, do not warrant prosecution. Compelling relatives of the husband to face trial based on vague allegations amounts to an abuse of the legal process and causes unnecessary harassment.” 9. In the present case, apart from vague and general allegations against accused Nos.3 and 4, there are no specific allegations or overt acts suggesting that they subjected the complainant to continuous physical or mental cruelty. In the absence of such specific allegations, continuing the investigation against the petitioners based on general and omnibus statements would constitute an abuse of the legal process. ORDER i) Accordingly, the criminal petition is allowed. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1095 CRL.P No. 103884 of 2024 ii) The impugned FIR in Crime No.88/2024 registered by the Hubballi-Dharwad City Women Police Station, Hubli North Sub-Division, insofar as it relates to petitioners/accused Nos.3 & 4, is hereby quashed. iii) Respondent No.1 to investigate the complaint lodged by the second respondent against accused Nos.1 and 2 in accordance with law. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE KMS Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 63