SMT NEELAMMA @ NILAVVA vs THE STATE

Court
Karnataka High Court

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11144
CRL.P No. 201264 of 2025


CNR: KAHC030102722025



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA


KALABURAGI BENCH


TH
DATED THIS THE 8 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 201264 OF 2025

(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)
BETWEEN:

1. SMT NEELAMMA @ NILAVVA
W/O NANJAPPA UPPAR
AGE 54 YEARS,
OCC :HOUSEHOLD

2. SRI NANJAPPA
S/O KARIYAPPA UPPAR
AGE :67 YEARS,
OCC : AGRICULTURE

3.
SRI MOUNESH
S/O NANJAPPA UPPAR
AGE 42 YEARS,
OCC : AGRICULTURE
ALL ARE R/O HADRIHALLI VILLAGE
TQ.HIREHALLI,
DIST.HAVERI – 581110

4. SMT. RENUKA
W/O BHARAMAPPA UPPAR
AGE 31 YEARS,
OCC : HOUSEHOLD
R/O HADRIHALLI VILLAGE
TQ.HIREKERUR,
DIST.HAVERI – 581 116
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. PRADEEPKUMAR, ADVOCATE)










Digitally signed
by R
MANJUNATHA
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11144
CRL.P No. 201264 of 2025


CNR: KAHC030102722025


AND:

1.
THE STATE
THROUGH JEWARGI POLICE
STATION, REPRESENTED BY
ADDL SPP HIGH COURT OF BUILDING
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
AT KALABURAGI – 585102

2.
SMT. SHARANAMMA
W/O SHIVAKUMAR UPPAR
AGE 29 YEARS,
OCC :HOUSEHOLD
R/O DATTA NAGAR, JEWARGI
NOW AT SONNA, TQ.JEWARGI
DIST.KALABURAGI – 585310
…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT
PLEADER FOR R1;
SRI SANTHOSH PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C. (OLD), UNDER SECTION 528 OF BNSS (NEW),
PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR, CHARGE SHEET AND ITS
FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.236/2024 ARISEN OUT OF
CRIME NO.0144/2024 REGISTERED BY THE JEWARGI POLICE
STATION, FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTIONS 498(A), 323, 324, 504, 506, R/W 149 INDIAN
PENAL CODE 1860 AND SECTION 3 AND 4 DOWRY
PROHIBITION ACT 1961 PENDING ON THE FILE LEARNED
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT JEWARGI IN THE INTEREST
OF JUSTICE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11144
CRL.P No. 201264 of 2025


CNR: KAHC030102722025


ORAL ORDER
Heard Sri Pradeepkumar, learned counsel for the
petitioners, Sri Jamadar Shahabuddin, learned High Court
Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri Santosh Patil,
learned counsel for respondent No.2.

2. Petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the following prayer:
“Wherefore, it is most humbly prayed that Hon'ble
court may be pleased to quash the FIR, Charge sheet
and its further proceedings in C.C.No.236/2024 arisen
out of Crime No.0144/2024 registered by the Jewargi
Police Station, for the alleged offences punishable
under sections 498(A), 323, 324, 504, 506 R/W 149
Indian Penal Code 1860 and Sec.3 and 4 Dowry
Prohibition Act 1961 pending on the file Learned Senior
Civil Judge and JMFC at Jewargi in the interest of
justice.”

3. A complaint came to be lodged by the second
respondent against the petitioners herein. It is found from the
complaint averments that second respondent married the first
accused Shivakumar. In fact, the love affair between second
respondent and first petitioner was brought to the notice of the

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11144
CRL.P No. 201264 of 2025


CNR: KAHC030102722025


members of both families and there was an arrange marriage in
the house of accused No.1 - Shivakumar and at that juncture
there was a payment of Rs.5,00,000/- as the dowry amount
and 10 tola gold.

4. Subsequent to marriage, there was further demand
of 25 tola of gold and a car which was not able to be met with
by the second respondent. Therefore there was a physical
assault and petitioners herein have abetted the commission of
the offence said to have committed by accused No.1.

5. According to the prosecution, Sri. Revanasiddappa
Gowda - CW11 is the eyewitness to the incident.

6. On close perusal of his statement for the sake of
considering the case of the prosecution as well as the
petitioners, insofar as demand of dowry and the earlier
harassment, if any, said Revanasiddappa Gowda is not an
eyewitness.

7. He is the eyewitness even according to the
prosecution only for the incident that occurred on 28.04.2024
wherein first accused Shivakumar said to have assaulted the
mother of the second respondent with an iron rod.

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11144
CRL.P No. 201264 of 2025


CNR: KAHC030102722025



8. Wound certificate placed on record would go to
show that there is a simple injury sustained by mother of the
second respondent.

9. There is no mention about the presence of
participation of these petitioners in the incident that took place
on 28.04.2024.

10. Therefore, the petitioners have sought for quashing
of the charge sheet as against these petitioners on the ground
that they are all residents of Haveri District and alleged incident
has taken place in Jewargi.

11. Per contra, Sri Jamdar Shahabuddin and Sri.
Santosh Patil would support the filing of the charge sheet and
would submit that grounds alleged in the petition are more in
the nature of defence which needs to be established during the
trial and thus sought for dismissal of the petition.

12. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this
Court perused the material on record meticulously.

13. On such perusal of the material on record, it is
noticed that admittedly the petitioners are residents of Haveri
district and they did not participate in the alleged incident

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11144
CRL.P No. 201264 of 2025


CNR: KAHC030102722025


wherein mother of the second respondent has been assaulted
on 28.04.2024 by the first accused.

14. CW11-Revanasiddappa Gowda is not an eyewitness
to the earlier alleged cruelty or the abetment said to have been
committed by these petitioners in accused No.1 harassing the
second respondent.

15. From the statement of CW11 itself, it is clear that
he came to know about the payment of Rs.5,00,000/- cash and
10 tola of gold at the time of marriage in the house of accused
No.1.

16. So also, in respect of the subsequent demand and
the alleged physical and mental harassment according to the
CW11 is informed to him by second respondent.

17. In other words, in respect of the payment of dowry
at the time of marriage or subsequent demand, CW11 is not an
eyewitness and is a hearsay witness.

18. At the most, his evidence could only help the
prosecution in proving that there was an assault made by the
accused No.1 to mother of the second respondent on
28.04.2024.

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11144
CRL.P No. 201264 of 2025


CNR: KAHC030102722025



19. This Court is not oblivious of the fact that at the
stage of considering the request for quashing the charge sheet
a mini trial cannot be carried out by this Court to ascertain the
merits or demerits of the case.

20. However, this Court is not precluded from
considering the material on record including the statement of
the charge sheet witnesses for the purpose of finding out
whether at all any prima facie materials are found against the
petitioners herein so as to direct them to stand for the trial.

21. When such an exercise is carried out even
according to the prosecution, CW11 is the only witness who
could throw some light as to the alleged roles of the present
petitioners in the demand of dowry and the harassment
thereof.

22. As discussed supra, the statement of
Revanasiddappa Gowda would not make out any ingredients
whatsoever as against these petitioners are concerned for the
offence of demand of dowry or the harassment thereof.

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11144
CRL.P No. 201264 of 2025


CNR: KAHC030102722025



23. Moreover petitioners are admittedly residents of
Haveri and the incident said to have occurred in the house of
the first accused at Jewargi.

24. Thus, applying the principles of law enunciated in
Kahkashan Kausar Alias Sonam vs. State of Bihar and
others
reported in (2022)6 SCC 599, this Court is of the
considered opinion that continuation of the criminal case as
against the petitioners is no longer warranted and would result
in abuse of process of law.

25. Hence, following:
ORDER
allowed.
(i) Petition is

(ii) Pending proceedings in C.C.No.236/2024,
on the file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC.,
Jewargi, arising out of Cr.No.144/2024 of
Jewargi Police Station insofar as petitioners
herein is quashed.

(iii) It is made clear that quashing of the
pending proceedings insofar as these
petitioners are concerned would not in any

- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11144
CRL.P No. 201264 of 2025


CNR: KAHC030102722025


way affect the merits of the matter insofar
as the first accused is concerned.

Sd/-
(V SRISHANANDA)
JUDGE

MR
List No.: 19 Sl No.: 6
CT:VRR