- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1348 CRL.P No. 8247 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8247 OF 2022 BETWEEN: 1. VIJAY. S. RATHOD AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, S/O. MR. S.G. RATHOD, PERMANENT RESIDENCE, #D 1302, VAISHNAVI NAKSHATRA, 9/36, TUMKUR ROAD, YESHWANTPUR, BANGALORE - 560 022. 2. SHANTAPPA. G. RATHOD AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, S/O. LATE GOVINDAPPA, R/AT #D 1302, VAISHNAVI NAKSHATRA, 9/36, TUMKUR ROAD, YESHWANTPUR, BANGALORE - 560 022. 3. SHASHIKALA RATHOD AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, W/O. S. G. RATHOD, R/AT #D 1302, VAISHNAVI NAKSHATRA, 9/36, TUMKUR ROAD, YESHWANTPUR, BANGALORE - 560 022. 4. SMITHA S. RATHOD AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, D/O. S.G. RATHOD, R/AT #D 1302, VAISHNAVI NAKSHATRA, 9/36, TUMKUR ROAD, YESHWANTPUR, BANGALORE - 560 022. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. ABHIJEET S.K. RAI, ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER NO.P1, P3 AND P4 Digitally signed by PRASHANTH N V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1348 CRL.P No. 8247 of 2022 PETITION IN RESPECT OF P.2 IS ABATED.) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY EAST ZONE WOMEN POLICE STATION, SHIVAJINAGAR, BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, OFFICE OF THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BANGALORE. 2. CHANDRAKALA @ CHAITRA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, D/O. LATE MR. R. RANGANAIK, RESIDING AT NO. 21, SAMMRUDDI SUITS, DODDATHOGURU VILLAGE, ELECTRONIC CITY, BANGALORE-560100. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SOWMYA R., HCGP FOR R1 SRI. NAVEED AHMED, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS IN CR.NO.50/2021 REGISTERED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EAST ZONE WOMEN POLICE STATION, SHIVAJINAGAR AS PER ANNEXURE-J ON THE BASIS OF COMPLAINT LODGED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A, 506 OF IPC AND SECTION 3 AND 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT AND QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.33597/2021 AGAINST THE PETITIONERS FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A, 32, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC AND SECTION 4 OF D.P. ACT ON THE FILE OF VI ADDL.C.M.M., BENGALURU. THIS CRL.P, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1348 CRL.P No. 8247 of 2022 CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA ORAL ORDER The petitioners being accused Nos.1 to 4 in CC.No.33597/2021 on the file of the learned VI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short 'DP Act') are seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them. 2. During the pendency of petition, petitioner - accused No.2 died. Hence, the petition filed by petitioner No.2 is dismissed as abated. 3. Heard Sri. Abhijeet S K Rai, learned counsel for the petitioners, Smt. Sowmya R, learned HCGP for respondent No.1 and Sri. Naveed Ahmed, learned counsel for respondent No.2. Perused the materials on record. 4. In view of the rival contentions urged by learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1348 CRL.P No. 8247 of 2022 "Whether the petitioners have made out any grounds to allow the petition and to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them?" My answer to the above point is in the 'Affirmative' for the following: REASONS 5. Respondent No.2 filed the first information in East Zone Women Police Station, Shivajinagar against accused Nos.1 to 4. Accordingly, the FIR came to be registered and the investigation was undertaken. The charge sheet came to be registered in CC.No.33597/2021 summoning the petitioners. 6. Admitted facts are that, accused No.1 married respondent No.2 on 02.06.2017. Initially, respondent No.2 had filed a similar complaint against accused No.1 which was registered in CC.No.20306/2018. It is stated that accused No.1 herein was acquitted in the said case vide order dated 12.02.2019 as respondent No.2 has turned hostile. 7. It is brought to the notice of the Court that accused No.3 being the mother-in-law of respondent No.2 filed the suit in OS.No.5847/2017 before the Trial Court seeking permanent - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1348 CRL.P No. 8247 of 2022 injunction restraining respondent No.2 from entering the matrimonial house. It is stated that by that time respondent No.2 has already gone out of the matrimonial house and started residing in her parental house. It is also the contention of the petitioners that there was reconciliation and accused No.1 and respondent No.2 started residing separately, while the parents-in-laws and the sister-in-laws started residing separately. Therefore, the suit in OS.No.5847/2017 came to be withdrawn. 8. Now it is contention of the petitioners that, accused No.1 filed MC.No.591/2021 on 25.01.2021 seeking dissolution of marriage, as respondent No.2 had again deserted accused No.1 and he was treated with cruelty. Immediately thereafter i.e., on 31.01.2021 the present complaint appears to have been filed and the FIR came to be registered on 08.04.2021. 9. Even though, respondent No.2 has filed a detailed complaint, many of the allegations are relating to the incident that had occurred during the year 2017. There is also reference to the earlier criminal case registered in Crime No.267/2017 which was said to have been withdrawn, but the materials on - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1348 CRL.P No. 8247 of 2022 record discloses that CC.No.20306/2018 ended in acquittal of accused No.1 as per Annexure-C3. There is an allegation that on 01.01.2021 accused No.1 has assaulted respondent No.2 and tried to cause her death projecting it as suicide. In that regard, she said to have approached the police. There is also an allegation that on 11.01.2021, she was being insisted by accused No.1 to vacate the house where they were residing, for which respondent No.2 refused. Regarding the assault made by accused No.1, no wound certificate or any other medical certificate is produced. 10. Prima facie, it discloses that initially similar complaint was filed by respondent No.2 making allegations against the accused which was tried in CC.No.20306/2018 and it has ended in acquittal on 12.02.2019. There was a conciliation between the parties, and husband and wife started residing separately, even then there was rifts between the spouse. Accused No.1 filed MC.No.591/2021 on 25.01.2021 seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty. Immediately thereafter, on 31.01.2021 first information came to be filed and the FIR came to be registered subsequently. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1348 CRL.P No. 8247 of 2022 11. In view of these facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that, criminal compliant came to be filed making bald and general allegations against the accused without there being any specific averments or supporting documents. When there are no prima facie materials to constitute the offences as alleged, I am of the opinion that initiation and continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioners would be an abuse of process of law and no purpose would be served by prosecuting them. Hence, I am of the opinion that criminal case registered against the petitioners are 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 petitioners - accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 herein in CC.No.33597/2021 on the file of the learned VI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru registered for the offences punishable - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1348 CRL.P No. 8247 of 2022 under Sections 498A, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, is hereby quashed. Sd/- (M G UMA) JUDGE PNV CT:VS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 16