GAYATHRI AND OTHERS Vs. RAJANNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NONE appeared on behalf of the petitioners though the matter is listed for admission. Petition is already four years old, therefore, I find no justifiable grounds to adjourn the matter. I have perused the petition and the grounds urged therein.

(2.) IN this petition, the petitioners have sought for quashing the prosecution launched' -against them in C.C. No. 11590/2007 on the file of the V Additional C.M.M., Bangalore, for the offences punishable under Sections 493, 494, 495 r/w. 34 of IPC.

(3.) THE learned Magistrate before whom the complaint was presented, took cognizance of the offences alleged, recorded the sworn statement of the complainant and his witnesses, and by order dated 23.04.2007 directed registration of the case and issue of process to the accused persons. Thereafter, the petitioners have presented this petition on 12.10.2009 inter alia on the grounds that petitioner Nos. 2 to 6 are not at all aware about the marriage of petitioner No. 1 with the respondent and that petitioner No. 6 is not related in whatsoever manner with the offences alleged; that the complaint filed by Respondent No. 1 was with a view to harass the petitioners though there is no substance in the allegations and it is in retaliation to the criminal case initiated by petitioner No. 1 for the offences punishable under Sections 498 -A, 506(B) r/w 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the present complaint is filed and that the petitioners are innocent and have not committed any of the offences alleged. Having perused the grounds urged, I am of the considered opinion that there are no justifiable grounds to entertain this petition for the reason that the grounds urged in this petition are all in the nature of defence pleas, which are required to be substantiated at the trial. This court in a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. cannot undertake the exercise of evaluating evidence and recording a finding thereon. The said exercise is required to be done by the trial court after full -fledged trial. In this view of the matter, I find no merit in this petition. Accordingly, the petition is rejected.