KUMARA SWAMY Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed by petitioner-accused No.1 under Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing criminal proceedings in Crime No.5/2022 registered by Women Police Station, Mysuru, for the offences punishable under Ss. 498A, 504, 506, 149 of IPC and Ss. 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State. Respondent No.2 is served and has remained absent.

(3.) The case of petitioner is that on the complaint of respondent No.2-Bhavyashree A.R., who is wife of the present petitioner, the police registered the complaint on 19/1/2022. It is alleged in the complaint that her marriage was solemnized on 28/6/2021 at K.R. Nagar. At the time of marriage, huge dowry articles said to be given. Though the petitioner asked for 30 grams of gold during negotiation of marriage, but a day prior to the marriage, the petitioner said to be demanded 250 grams of gold, the cash of Rs.15.00 lakhs, 1 acre of land, bike, etc. and they agreed for the same in the presence of elders and also handed over to the petitioner-accused. Subsequently, after the marriage, the petitioner-accused started harassing the complainant for additional dowry and therefore, she brought Rs.8.00 lakhs from her maternal home. Even though, she was pregnant for four months, the petitioner-accused was continuously harassing her bringing dowry as well as for gold. On 20/12/2021, a panchayat was held. Thereafter, the petitioner-accused left house and did not return. Subsequently, the respondent-complainant telephoned him, but the petitioner-accused did not respond either to her call or to the message. Again on the next day at 5.00 p.m., he came back and went inside the room and came out of the room at 6.30 p.m. and again he assaulted her and went out and did not return. She searched him, but it was in vain. Therefore, she went to office of the petitioner-accused and she was informed that he was on leave. Though she telephoned and messaged him, he had not responded. She filed complaint against the petitioner and his family members with Mysuru Woman Police where counselling was held and did not get fruitful result. Therefore, she approached the ACP as well as DCP. Subsequently, on 29/12/2021, she approached the Commissioner and though conciliation was made, the petitioner-accused did not take the respondent-complainant and he harassed her continuously. Therefore, she filed the present complaint. The police registered the case against the petitioner and other family members. Later, while filing charge sheet, the police dropped the family members of the petitioner and filed charge sheet against the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.