- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:6770 CRL.P No. 201348 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 201348 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. SUJATA W/O LATE RAVI HALCHERI AGE 26 YEARS OCC:HOUSEHOLD, R/O KANAMAS, TQ.ALAND, DIST.KALABURAGI-585302 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANTOSH PATIL, ADVOCATE [VC]) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH WADI RAILWAY POLICE STATION TQ.CHITTAPUR, DIST.KALABURAGI (REPRESENTED BY ADDL. SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH - 585 107) 2. AMRUTH S/O BHIMSHA HALCHERI AGE 49 YEARS OCC AGRICULTURE R/O MARGUTTI VILLAGE Digitally signed by NANDINI B G Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:6770 CRL.P No. 201348 of 2025 TQ.KAMALAPUR DIST.KALABURAGI - 585 313 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. ANITHA M. REDDY, HCGP FOR R1; R2-SERVED) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C.(OLD), U/S 528 OF BNSS (NEW) PRAYING TO, IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN ORDER TO PREVENT THE ABUSE OF PROCESS OF LAW, IT IS HUMBLY PRAYED TO THE HONOURABLE COURT TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING AGAINST THE ACCUSED NO.1/PETITIONER IN SC NO. 158/2024 PENDING ON THE FILE OF OF III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT AT KALABURAGI, ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO. 11/2022 OF WADI RAILWAY POLICE STATION, DISTRICT KALABURAGI FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/SEC. 306 R/W SEC. 34 OF IPC, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA) Though the petition is listed for admission, with the consent of learned counsel for both the parties, it is taken up for final disposal. 2. The petitioner being accused No.1 in Crime No.11/2022 of Wadi Railway Police Station, Kalaburagi, now pending on the file of learned Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:6770 CRL.P No. 201348 of 2025 Court, Afzalpur in C.C.No.786/2023 registered for the offence punishable under Section 306 R/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’), is seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him. 3. Heard Sri Santosh Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Anitha M Reddy, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 – State. Respondent No.2 though served with notice has remained unrepresented. Perused the materials on record. 4. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is: “Whether the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner is liable to be quashed invoking inherent power under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023?” My answer to the above point is in ‘Affirmative’ for the following: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:6770 CRL.P No. 201348 of 2025 REASONS 5. Respondent No.2 being the father of the deceased lodged the first information with Wadi Railway Police Station against accused Nos.1 and 2 alleging that, his son-Ravi committed suicide and accused No.2 being the superior officer of the deceased and accused No.1 being the wife of the deceased have abetted commission of suicide. Therefore, he requested the police to register the case and to initiate criminal action against them. Accordingly, the FIR came to be registered and investigation was undertaken. After investigation, charge sheet came to be filed for the above said offence. 6. The prosecution has cited as many as 27 witnesses. CWs.11 to 18 are the colleagues/friends of the deceased. Their statements are stereotyped to state that, accused No.2 was working as Sub Post Master and the deceased was working as Dak Sevak under accused No.2. The deceased used to attend his duty under the influence of alcohol and accused No.2 being the higher officer used to warn him not to come to the office in a drunken state. He advised the deceased to resign from the job and that is the reason for which he committed suicide. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:6770 CRL.P No. 201348 of 2025 Apart from that, accused No.1 being the wife of the deceased had also abetted commission of the offence and thus, accused Nos.1 and 2 are responsible for abetting commission of the suicide. 7. It is stated that as per the final report, CWs.11 to 14 have given statement regarding the abetment committed by the present petitioner i.e., accused No.1 as she is responsible for the death of the deceased. The statements of these witnesses disclose that deceased was addicted to drinks and he used to attend the duty under the influence of alcohol. In that regard, there used to be frequent quarrel in the house with accused No.1. It is stated that whenever there was a quarrel between deceased and accused No.1, she used to abuse the deceased that it is better to go and die. During the course of quarreling, if such words are uttered, that may not amount to abetment, for the simple reason that the petitioner - accused No.1 being the wife must have fed up with the conduct of the deceased. 8. The deceased had left a death note referring the names of accused Nos.1 and 2 as they are responsible for his - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:6770 CRL.P No. 201348 of 2025 death. Apart from that, there is absolutely no material to connect the present petitioner to the death of the deceased and to contend that she has abetted the suicide by the deceased. 9. It is brought to the notice of the Court that accused No.2 had approached this Court by filing Crl.P.200476/2024 and the said petition came to be allowed by forming an opinion that accused No.2 is a Sub-post Master and the Superior Officer of the deceased. He must have asked the deceased to come to the office regularly and do his work and must have scolded as he used to visit the office under the influence of alcohol. Under these circumstances, it cannot be said that there was abetment done by accused No.2 to commit suicide. The petition filed by accused No.2 is already allowed and the criminal proceedings against him is already quashed. 10. Even though Section 306 of IPC is invoked against the present petitioner - accused No.1 who is the wife of the deceased, I do not find prima facie case to constitute the offence. Under such circumstance, registration of criminal proceedings against petitioner - accused No.1 is an abuse of process of law. Hence, the same is liable to be quashed. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:6770 CRL.P No. 201348 of 2025 11. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The petition is allowed. ii) Criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner-accused No.1 in Crime No.11/2022 of Wadi Railway Police Station, Kalaburagi, now pending on the file of learned III Additional District and Sessions Court, Kalaburagi, for the offence punishable under Section 306 R/w Section 34 of IPC, is quashed. Sd/- (M G UMA) JUDGE PNV List No.: 19 Sl No.: 3