- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2550 CRL.P No. 5232 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5232 OF 2018 BETWEEN: DR. APPAKONDU SRINIVASA REDDY M.B.B.S., M.D.,(CARDIOLOGY), USA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, S/O SRI APPAKONDU RAMA SUBBA REDDY, PRESENTLY AT NO.120, CAMPBELL DRIVE, APARTMENT NO.118, HAZARD, KENTUCKY-41701, U.S.A …PETITIONER (BY SRI. C.V. NAGESH, SR. ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RAGHAVENDRA K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER RAMAMURTHYNAGAR POLICE STATION, BENGALURU - 560 016 REPRESENTED BY THE SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU - 560 001 2. SMT. MANGALA SURYADEVARA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, D/O. SRI. KOTESHWARA RAO SURYADEVA, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT #2 BC 829 HRBR LAYOUT, 1ST BLOCK, KALYAN NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 043 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SOWMYA R., HCGP FOR R1 V/O DT.14/10/22, NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) Digitally signed by PRASHANTH N V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2550 CRL.P No. 5232 of 2018 THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 25.04.2014 AND TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN C.C.NO.52513/2014 PENDING ON THE FILE OF X A.C.M.M., BANGALORE FOR AN OFFENCE P/U/S 498A OF IPC AND SEC.3, 4 OF D.P ACT. THIS CRL.P, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA ORAL ORDER The petitioner being accused No.1 in CC.No.52513/2014 pending on the file of the learned X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayo Hall, Bengaluru, is seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him for the offences punishable under Section 498-A of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, (for short 'DP Act'). 2. Heard Sri. C V. Nagesh, learned Senior advocate for Sri. Raghavendra K, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Soumya R, learned HCGP for respondent No.1. Perused the materials on record. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2550 CRL.P No. 5232 of 2018 3. In view of the rival contentions urged by learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is: "Whether the petitioner has made out any grounds to allow the petition and to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him?" My answer to the above point is in the 'Affirmative' for the following: REASONS 4. The first contention raised by learned senior advocate for the petitioner is that, the petitioner married respondent No.2 on 15.12.2006 and their marriage was dissolved by a decree of divorce dated 15.07.2009. The criminal proceedings which is under challenge in this petition was initiated on the basis of first information dated 01.10.2013 registered in Crime No.435/2013 of Banaswadi Police Station. It is contended by the learned senior advocate that, the decree of divorce granted by the Court at U.S.A i.e., Commonwealth of Kentucky, was challenged by respondent No.2 before the Civil Court at Bengaluru, but the said suit came to be dismissed as - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2550 CRL.P No. 5232 of 2018 respondent No.2 had contested the matter before the Court at U.S.A, which ended in divorce. 5. Learned senior advocate also contended that accused Nos.2 and 3 are the former-in-laws of respondent No.2 and they were already discharged as per the order passed by the learned Magistrate and confirmed by the Divisional Court. Therefore, it is the contention of learned senior advocate for the petitioner that, there is no relationship of husband and wife between the petitioner and respondent No.2, which is the mandatory requirement to invoke Section 498-A of IPC. I do find considerable force in contentions taken by the learned senior advocate in that regard. 6. It is not in dispute that the marriage between respondent No.2 and the petitioner was dissolved by a decree of divorce dated 15.07.2009. Therefore, as on the date of filing of complaint i.e., on 01.10.2013 there was no relationship of husband and wife between them. When there is no relationship of husband and wife between the petitioner and respondent No.2, accused Nos.2 and 3 who are father and mother of the petitioner were discharged for the very same offences by the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2550 CRL.P No. 5232 of 2018 learned Magistrate. The order discharging accused Nos.2 and 3 has already reached finality. 7. The complaint dated 01.10.2013 was filed about four years after decree of divorce. Therefore, prima facie, I am of the opinion that the criminal proceedings against the petitioner cannot be sustained and such initiation of proceedings is in abuse of process of law and no purpose would be served by prosecuting him. Hence, I am of the opinion that the criminal case registered against the petitioner is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the 'Affirmative' and proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The petition is allowed. ii) The criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner - accused No.1 herein in CC.No.52513/2014 registered for the offences punishable under Section 498- A of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, pending on the file of the learned X - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2550 CRL.P No. 5232 of 2018 Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayo Hall, Bengaluru, is hereby quashed. SD/- (M G UMA) JUDGE PNV CT:VS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 12