- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18836 CRL.P No. 4029 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4029 OF 2022 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SMT. RAJALAKSHMI R W/O RAJU A/A 46 YEARS, R/A NO.47/1, 17TH CROSS, AGRAHARA DASARAHALLI BENGALURU NORTH BENGALURU-560079 &PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAKSHITH R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ANNAPORNESHWARI NAGAR P.S. REP BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE-01 2. SMT. SHOBA S W/O SATISH.R AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT 457, 6TH CROSS, HEALTH LAYOUT SRIGHANDADA KAVAL, VISHWANEEDAM POST BANGALORE-560091 &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.R.PATIL, HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR RESPONDENT NO.1; Digitally signed by HEMALATHA J Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18836 CRL.P No. 4029 of 2022 SMT. USHA DEVI K.G., ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2 (ABSENT)) THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR DATED 30.03.2022 REGISTERED AGAINST THIS PETITIONER IN CR.NO.75/2022 OF THE ANNAPOORNESHWARI NAGAR P.S., PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE V ACMM, BENGLAURU FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 498A, 323 READ WITH SECTION 34 OF IPC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioner has filed this petition challenging the registration of an FIR in Crime No.75/2022 by the respondent No.1 for the offences punishable under Section 498A, 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, 8IPC9), pending on the file of V Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nrupathunga Road, Bengaluru. 2. The respondent No.2 informed the respondent No.1 on 30.03.2022 that she was given in marriage to the accused No.1. She claimed that on 25.03.2022 at about 11.20 p.m., her husband assaulted her. She claimed that her husband and his - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18836 CRL.P No. 4029 of 2022 sister, namely the petitioner herein had planned to attack her and tried to prove that she was unchaste and that her son was not born to the accused No.1. She also alleged that she was in possession of a pen drive belonging to her husband which contained various recordings which indicated that the attack on her on 25.03.2022 was a pre-planned attack by her husband and the petitioner herein. Based on this, the respondent No.1 registered a case in Crime No.75/2022 for the offences punishable under Section 498A, 323 read with Section 34 of the IPC against the accused No.1 and the petitioner herein. 3. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a perusal of the information furnished by respondent No.2 to the respondent No.1 does not show that the petitioner had committed any offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC. He submits that the petitioner did not exhort her to commit suicide or cause any physical pain and also did not make any demand for dowry and therefore, the petitioner was not cruel as alleged by the respondent No.2. He, therefore, contends that - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18836 CRL.P No. 4029 of 2022 the continuation of the FIR against the petitioner is unwarranted. 5. The learned High Court Government Pleader, after perusing the information furnished by the respondent No.2 submits that the respondent No.2 claimed that she is in possession of a pen drive which would reveal that both the petitioner and her brother/accused No.1 were responsible for the attack on her on 25.03.2022 and therefore, submits that the same requires investigation. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 is absent and this Court did not have the benefit of her submissions. 7. A perusal of the complaint lodged by the respondent No.2 shows that she apprehended that the petitioner and her brother/accused No.1 were responsible for the attack on her on the night of 25.03.2022. Except this statement in the complaint, there is nothing to show the involvement of the petitioner in the alleged attack on the respondent No.2 on the said date. Even otherwise, there are no allegations in the complaint that constitute an offence under Section 498A of IPC. It is not the case of the respondent No.2 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18836 CRL.P No. 4029 of 2022 that the petitioner had physically caused any pain or harm or injury to her. Therefore, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the registration of an F.I.R against the petitioner for an offence under Section 498A of IPC was wholly unwarranted. Consequently, the petition is allowed. The case in Crime No.75/2022 registered by the respondent No.1 for the offences punishable under Section 498A, 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, pending on the file of V Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nrupathunga Road, Bengaluru, against the petitioner/accused No.2 is quashed. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE SMA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36