NAGARAJA UPADHYAYA, SMT. JAYASHREE, MR. G. N. BADRINARAYANA AND SMT. G. N. KUSUMA Vs. STATE BY KORAMANGALA POLICE KORAMANGALA AND SMT. SOWMYA M HEGDE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN these two petitions the petitioners have prayed for quashing the proceedings in C. C. No. 7876/2010 on the file of VIII A.C.M.M. Bangalore for the offences punishable under Section 498A, 420 r/w 34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The petitioners in Crl. P. No. 724/2011 are accused Nos. 2 to 5 and the petitioner in Crl. P. No. 654/2012 is accused No. 1 in C.C. No. 7876/2010 pending on the file of Trial Court. The respondent in both the petitions is the complainant. In this order for convenience the parties are referred to their status before the trial Court. Accused No. 1 is the husband of second respondent. Second respondent/complainant married the accused No. 1 on 27.03.2008. After marriage the second respondent went to United Kingdom with her husband. On account of some differences between second respondent and her husband she lodged a complaint on 12.8.2008 with the police at United Kingdom inter -alia contending that she was subjected to verbal and physical abuse, she was punched, kicked, beaten, slapped, thrown to the floor etc. After some time the second respondent left United Kingdom and returned to India in the month of August 2008. Thereafter the second respondent withdrew her complaint against her husband filed before the police at United Kingdom as per Annexure -C dated 15.8.2008 and the same reads as under: 15/08/2008 From: Smt. Sowmya Mahadevaru Hegde Bangalore271, 18th 'D' Mani6th Block, Koramangala,Bangalore 95.Karnataka, India. To: Chief Superintendent of PoliceKendal Police stationBusher WalkKendal, LA9 4RJ. Sir, Sub: Regarding the withdrawal of my complaint against Dr. Subramanya Gopadi Nagaraja Upadhayaya Dated 12/08/2008 With reference to the above I submit that a complaint was filed by me against my husband Dr. Subramanya Gopadi Nagaraja Upadhyaya relating to domestic violence. But as assured by my husband through his father to settle the matter amicably to maintain the harmonious relationship of our marital life for our welfare. I intend to withdraw my complaint for time. Thanking you, Yours faithfully, Sd/ -Soumya Mahadevaru Hegadu

(2.) NOW the second respondent lodged complaint with the first respondent police and the same came to be registered in Cr. No. 104/2009 for the offences punishable tinder Section 498A, 420 and 430 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. After investigation charge sheet is fried in C.C. No. 7876/2010 on the file of VIII ACMM, Bangalore.

(3.) SECOND respondent after her return from United Kingdom in the month of August 2008 is residing separately from accused Nos. 2 to 5. It is seen from the record that there are exchange of Email between second respondent and her husband and also exchange of lawyer's notices. In the Email correspondence and exchange of lawyer's notices also no allegations are made against accused Nos. 2 to 5. Therefore, the implication of accused Nos. 2 to 5 in the criminal proceedings is nothing but abuse of process of law. On this ground also the proceedings against accused Nos. 2 to 5 are liable to be quashed.