- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1507 CRL.P No. 200390 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200390 OF 2024 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. YALLAPPA S/O MAREPPA VADAVATTI, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O YERAMASAL VILLAGE, TQ. DEVADURGA, DIST. RAICHUR-584101. 2. MANJAMMA D/O YALLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O YERAMASAL VILLAGE, TQ. DEVADURGA, DIST. RAICHUR-584101. 3. YALLAMMA W/O MAREPPA VADAVATTI, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O YERAMASAL VILLAGE, TQ. DEVADURGA, DIST. RAICHUR-584101. 4. MANAPPA S/O MAREPPA VADAVATTI, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O YERAMASAL VILLAGE, TQ. DEVADURGA, DIST. RAICHUR-584101. 5. LAKSHMI W/O MANAPPA VADAVATTI, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O YERAMASAL VILLAGE, TQ. DEVADURGA, DIST. RAICHUR-584101. 6. SHARANAPPA S/O SABANNA SAVUR, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, Digitally signed by RENUKA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1507 CRL.P No. 200390 of 2024 R/O YERAMASAL VILLAGE, TQ. DEVADURGA, DIST. RAICHUR-584101. 7. KENCHAPPA S/O GYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O YERAMASAL VILLAGE, TQ. DEVADURGA, DIST. RAICHUR-584101. 8. MANAPPA S/O NINGAPPA SAVUR, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O YERAMASAL VILLAGE, TQ. DEVADURGA, DIST. RAICHUR-584101. 9. HANAMANTH S/O NINGAPPA SAVUR, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O YERAMASAL VILLAGE, TQ. DEVADURGA, DIST. RAICHUR-584101. 10. MALLAMMA W/O YALLAPPA NASIYAR, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O GOVINDPALLI @ GONDIPALLI VILLAGE, TQ. DEVADURGA, DIST. RAICHUR-584101. 11. BASAVARAJ S/O YALLAPPA NASIYAR, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O GOVINDPALLI @ GONDIPALLI VILLAGE, TQ. DEVADURGA, DIST. RAICHUR-584101. 12. SHIVAPPA S/O YALLAPPA NASIYAR, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O GOVINDPALLI @ GONDIPALLI VILLAGE, TQ. DEVADURGA, DIST. RAICHUR-584101. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI MAHANTESH PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, R/ BY ADDL. SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1507 CRL.P No. 200390 of 2024 KALABURAGI BENCH, THROUGH TALUK SHORAPUR, DIST. YADGIR-585102. 2. MALAMMA W/O YALLAPPA VADAVATTI, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O YERAMASAL VILLAGE, NOW R/O KAKKERA, TQ. DEVADURGA, DIST. RAICHUR-585102. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP FOR R1; SRI MANJUNATH M. SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER OF TAKING COGNIZANCE DATED 02.12.2023 IN P.C.NO.43/2023 (C.C.NO.5703/2023), FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SEC. 494, 511 R/W SECTION 149 OF IPC AND ALSO QUASH THE INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS, WHICH IS NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SHORAPUR. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH) This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the order of taking cognizance dated - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1507 CRL.P No. 200390 of 2024 02.12.2023 in P.C.No.43/2023 (C.C.No.5703/2023), for the offences punishable under Sections 494, 511 read with Section 149 of IPC and also quash the initiation of proceedings against the petitioners, pending on the file of the learned Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Shorapur. 2. Brief facts of the case are as under: A private complaint has been lodged by the complainant stating that the complainant married accused No.1 about 17 years ago and stayed with him for ten years. As she was not able to beget a child, she was being harassed both mentally and physically and also insisted her to give consent for the second marriage to her husband. As she failed to give such consent, the petitioners started ill-treating her. 3. It is also stated that the accused No.1 without obtaining consent of the complainant, married accused No.2 as her second wife. Therefore, she filed a complaint before the Magistrate. The Magistrate after considering the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1507 CRL.P No. 200390 of 2024 averments of the complaint and also the sworn statement, took cognizance and issued summons. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners are before this Court. 4. Heard Sri Mahantesh Patil, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Jamadar Shahabuddin, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri Manjunath M. Shetty, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 5. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are the husband and the relatives of the husband of respondent No.2. Though, it is alleged that the accused No.1 married accused No.2 as second wife and other accused had performed the marriage by participating in the marriage ceremony knowingly that it is a second marriage of accused No.1, performed the same without obtaining valid divorce or consent from the first wife which is illegal. However, the fact remains that, no such marriage had taken place and - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1507 CRL.P No. 200390 of 2024 nothing has been produced by the respondent No.2 to substantiate the second marriage of accused No.1. 6. It is further submitted that the Trial Court has not verified any documents relating to second marriage and acted upon the oral evidence and took cognizance and issued summons to the petitioners, which is erroneous. Therefore, the same is liable to be set aside. Making such submissions, he prays to allow the petition. 7. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently submitted that the averments of the complaint would disclose that all the petitioners have jointly committed offences under Sections 494, 511 read with Section 149 of IPC. Therefore, it is not appropriate to quash the proceedings. Making such submission, he prays to dismiss the petition. 8. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 adopted the arguments of learned High Court Government Pleader and prays to dismiss the petition. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1507 CRL.P No. 200390 of 2024 9. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the averments of the complaint, it appears that the complainant namely, Malamma W/o Yallappa Vadavatti lodged a complaint stating that her husband Yallappa married Manjamma as his second wife during the subsistence of his first marriage and not obtained the divorce from her. It can also be seen in the said complaint that she had not begotten a child even after the lapse of ten years from her marriage. Therefore, she had been ill-treated in her matrimonial house and she was forced to give consent for the second marriage of her husband. 10. Be that as it may, in her complaint it is stated that the petitioner No.1 married petitioner No.2 on 12.05.2023 at about 12-30 p.m. at Mouneshwara temple situated at Tinthani village and all other petitioners participated in the said marriage and they have discharged their respective assignments in the said marriage. In the - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1507 CRL.P No. 200390 of 2024 said complaint, the complainant has incorporated Section 511 of IPC, which reads as under: “511. Punishment for attempting to commit offences punishable with imprisonment for life or other imprisonment.—Whoever attempts to commit an offence punishable by this Code with [imprisonment for life] or imprisonment, or to cause such an offence to be committed, and in such attempt does any act towards the commission of the offence, shall, where no express provision is made by this Code for the punishment of such attempt, be punished with [imprisonment of any description provided for the offence, for a term which may extend to one-half of the imprisonment for life or, as the case may be, one-half of the longest term of imprisonment provided for that offence], or with such fine as is provided for the offence, or with both”. 11. On careful reading of the above said provision makes it clear that punishment for attempting to commit offences punishable with imprisonment for life or other imprisonment. It means the said provision deals with an attempt to commit an offence not made punishable by other specific sections. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1507 CRL.P No. 200390 of 2024 12. On reading of the complaint, though it is stated that petitioner No.1 married petitioner No.2 and the complainant incorporated Section 494 read with Section 511 of IPC, it cannot be said that the petitioner No.1 married petitioner No.2 on the date and time as alleged in the complainant. In case, if the said marriage had taken place, as on the date and time as mentioned in the complaint, mentioning Section 511 of IPC would not have arisen. Since there is ambiguity in the complaint itself regarding the marriage between petitioner Nos.1 and 2, proceeding with the case on such grounds, in my considered opinion is a futile exercise. Therefore, the proceedings has to be quashed. 13. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The Criminal Petition is allowed. (ii) The order of taking cognizance dated 02.12.2023 in P.C.No.43/2023 (C.C.No.5703/2023), for the offences punishable under Sections 494, 511 read with - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1507 CRL.P No. 200390 of 2024 Section 149 of IPC and also the initiation of proceedings against the petitioners, pending on the file of the learned Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Shorapur are quashed. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE RSP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2/CT:PK