GIRIJAMMA, W/O LATE RANGASHETTY Vs. DHANASHEKAR,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the petitioners' counsel and learned AGA for respondent No.1-State.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case is that the marriage of the complainant was solemnized with petitioner No.1 on 26.02.2007 at CBS Kalyana Mantap at Gangavathi and at the time of the marriage, they have given a dowry of Rs.10 lakhs and also golden ornaments. Thereafter, she joined the matrimonial home and out of the said wedlock, the complainant is having 8 years old son and further allegation that for a period of three months, her husband looked after very well and thereafter, her parents-in-law and married sister-in-law subjected her to both mental and physical harassment and they were telling her to leave her husband as they were going to make second marriage to her husband and also harassing that she is not knowing house hold work and in this regard, panchayat was held and assurance was given that they would take care of her and took her back. It is further alleged in the complaint that again, they started harassing the complainant; her husband took her to parental house and in the said house, he abused her in filthy language and whenever he used to go to her parents house, she used to make request to him take her back to matrimonial home and at that time, he scolded and caused her life threat and when he did not take her back, she gave representation to Mahila Santvana Kendra and date is fixed in the said centre to appear on 7.4.2018 and on that day, her husband, parents-in-law and sister-in-law came to Gangavathi but they did not come to Santhvana Kendra and on the same day, they came to their house at 1 p.m. and again request was made to him to take her back to matrimonial home, but they abused her in filthy language and caused her life threat and also told that they are not sending her son with her; she waited for some time that her husband will come and take her back to matrimonial home, but he did not come, hence, she has filed a complaint before the Police. Based on the complaint, the police have registered the case against the petitioners.

(3.) The main contention of the petitioners in the petition that created and concocted false complaint is given to harass the petitioners on false accusations and there are no materials to proceed against the petitioners. The allegations made in the complaint is false, and when the meeting was held on 24.4.2018 in the Mahila Santvana Kendra, she herself expressed her desire to get divorce from petitioner No.1 and in this regard, Annexure-F also produced before this Court, hence, the petition deserves to be allowed. The other contention is that the incident was taken place on 7.4.2018 and the complaint was lodged on 21.09.2018 and the reasons caused for such delay is not satisfactorily explained in the complaint, this itself goes to show that the complaint is only afterthought and nothing is there to proceed or face trial and the same is nothing but mere harassment and inconvenience. The other allegations is that petitioner No.1 will marry another lady is nothing but creation and concocted story.