Full Judgment Text
- 1 -
NC: 2026:KHC:6978
CRL.P No. 7828 of 2018
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 6 DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7828 OF 2018
BETWEEN:
1. NIJALINGAPPA
S/O GUNDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
R/AT NANDIHALLI VILLAGE
HIRIYUR TALUK, CHITRADURGA
DISTRICT - 577 598
2. SMT. JANAKAMMA
W/O GUNDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS,
R/A NANDIHALLI VILLAGE
HIRIYUR TALUK, CHITRADURGA
DISTRICT - 577 598
3. SMT MANJULA
W/O OMKARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
R/A D.NO.1437, KALANILAYA
TH
4 CROSS, MTS COLONY
DASARAHALLI, BENGALURU
NORTH, BENGALURU - 570 057.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SYED ARIF PASHA, ADVOCATE FOR
Digitally signed
by PRASHANTH
N V
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka
SRI. LETHIF B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY WOMAN POLICE STATION
CHITRADURGA TOWN
REP BY S.P.P.,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENGALURU - 560 001
- 2 -
NC: 2026:KHC:6978
CRL.P No. 7828 of 2018
HC-KAR
2. SMT. PUSHPA,
W/O NIJALINGAPPA,
MAJOR, R/A MARAPPANAHATTI,
TH
9 CROSS, NEAR MAILARALINGA
TEMPLE, CHITRADURGA TALUK AND
DISTRICT - 577 591
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. SOWMYA R., HCGP FOR R1
SRI. R. SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 (AB))
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.1687/2018 (CR.NO.95/2017) ON
THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,
CHITRADURGA FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A, 323, 504, 114 R/W
34 OF IPC AGAINST THE PETITIONERS.
THIS CRL.P, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER
WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA
ORAL ORDER
The petitioners being accused Nos.1 to 3 in
CC.No.1687/2018 (Crime No.95/2017 of Women Police Station,
Chitradurga) pending on the file of the learned I Additional
Senior Civil Judge, Chitradurga registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 498(A), 323, 504, 114 read with
Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') are seeking to
quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them.
2. Heard Sri. Syed Asif Pasha, learned counsel for Sri.
Lethif. B, learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt. Soumya
- 3 -
NC: 2026:KHC:6978
CRL.P No. 7828 of 2018
HC-KAR
R, learned HCGP for respondent No.1. Perused the materials on
record.
3. In view of the rival contentions urged by learned
counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my
consideration is:
"Whether the petitioners have made out any
grounds to allow the petition and to quash the
criminal proceedings initiated against them?"
My answer to the above point is in the 'partly in the
affirmative' for the following:
REASONS
4. It is the contention of respondent No.2 that she
married petitioner No.1 - accused No.1 on 19.06.2003. They
got the first child on 08.04.2005. Thereafter accused No.1
started ill-treating her both physically and mentally. There is
reference to a petition filed before the Family Court,
Davanagere. However, at the intervention of elders it appears
that the dispute is amicably settled. Thereafter, second child
was born on 10.05.2007 and the third one on 01.11.2008. It is
- 4 -
NC: 2026:KHC:6978
CRL.P No. 7828 of 2018
HC-KAR
stated that accused No.2 is the mother and accused No.3 is the
sister of accused No.1.
5. As per the contentions taken by respondent No.2,
accused No.2 left her along with children in her parents house
and went away, even then he use to visit her house very
frequently and used to ill treat her. In that regard, again she
had approached the Family Court. At the advice of the brothers
of accused No.1, respondent No.2 appears to have withdrawn
the petition filed before the Family Court.
6. Respondent No.2 states that in view of all these
facts and circumstance, she was constrained to stay with her
parents. For some time she was residing separately, but
accused No.1 again came and picked up quarrel with her. She
was assaulted by accused No.1 on 03.07.2017 causing injuries.
However, the complaint was came to be filed on 27.11.2017.
The only allegations against accused Nos.2 and 3 is that they
are mother and sister of accused No.1 and they instigated
accused No.1 to commit the offence. Except this bold and
general allegation no prima facie materials are placed nor there
is any specific allegations against them for having committed
- 5 -
NC: 2026:KHC:6978
CRL.P No. 7828 of 2018
HC-KAR
any of the offence. Therefore, the criminal proceedings initiated
against accused Nos.2 and 3 is liable to be quashed as the
same is registered in abuse of process of law.
7. Petitioner No.1 being accused No.1 is not disputing
his relationship with respondent No.2. It is stated that
respondent No.2 filed the petition seeking maintenance under
Section 125 of Cr.P.C in Crl.Mis.No.96/2006 and the
maintenance amount was awarded to respondent No.2 and her
children. That order has reached finality as the revision filed
before this Court is dismissed. Inspite of that, it is stated that
petitioner No.1 was not paying any maintenance. When
petitioner No.1 is not disputing his relationship with respondent
No.2 and his three children, I do not find any justification for
him to deny the maintenance and abandon them. Moreover,
there are specific allegations made against him regarding
assault, ill-treatment on various occasions. Under such
circumstance, criminal proceedings initiated against petitioner
No.1 - accused No.1 is not liable to be quashed.
8. In view of the above, I answer the above point
'partly in the affirmative' and proceed to pass the following:
- 6 -
NC: 2026:KHC:6978
CRL.P No. 7828 of 2018
HC-KAR
ORDER
i) The petition is allowed-in-part .
ii) The petition against petitioner No.1 - accused
No.1 is dismissed .
iii) The petition against petitioner Nos.2 and 3 -
accused Nos.2 and 3 is allowed .
iv) The criminal proceedings initiated against the
petitioner Nos.2 and 3 - accused No.2 and 3 herein in
CC.No.1687/2018 (Crime No.95/2017 of Women Police
Station, Chitradurga) registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 498(A), 323, 504, 114 read
with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code pending on the file
of the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge,
Chitradurga, is hereby quashed.
SD/-
(M G UMA)
JUDGE
PNV - CT:VS
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10
NC: 2026:KHC:6978
CRL.P No. 7828 of 2018
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 6 DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7828 OF 2018
BETWEEN:
1. NIJALINGAPPA
S/O GUNDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
R/AT NANDIHALLI VILLAGE
HIRIYUR TALUK, CHITRADURGA
DISTRICT - 577 598
2. SMT. JANAKAMMA
W/O GUNDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS,
R/A NANDIHALLI VILLAGE
HIRIYUR TALUK, CHITRADURGA
DISTRICT - 577 598
3. SMT MANJULA
W/O OMKARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
R/A D.NO.1437, KALANILAYA
TH
4 CROSS, MTS COLONY
DASARAHALLI, BENGALURU
NORTH, BENGALURU - 570 057.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SYED ARIF PASHA, ADVOCATE FOR
Digitally signed
by PRASHANTH
N V
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka
SRI. LETHIF B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY WOMAN POLICE STATION
CHITRADURGA TOWN
REP BY S.P.P.,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENGALURU - 560 001
- 2 -
NC: 2026:KHC:6978
CRL.P No. 7828 of 2018
HC-KAR
2. SMT. PUSHPA,
W/O NIJALINGAPPA,
MAJOR, R/A MARAPPANAHATTI,
TH
9 CROSS, NEAR MAILARALINGA
TEMPLE, CHITRADURGA TALUK AND
DISTRICT - 577 591
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. SOWMYA R., HCGP FOR R1
SRI. R. SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 (AB))
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.1687/2018 (CR.NO.95/2017) ON
THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,
CHITRADURGA FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A, 323, 504, 114 R/W
34 OF IPC AGAINST THE PETITIONERS.
THIS CRL.P, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER
WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA
ORAL ORDER
The petitioners being accused Nos.1 to 3 in
CC.No.1687/2018 (Crime No.95/2017 of Women Police Station,
Chitradurga) pending on the file of the learned I Additional
Senior Civil Judge, Chitradurga registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 498(A), 323, 504, 114 read with
Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') are seeking to
quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them.
2. Heard Sri. Syed Asif Pasha, learned counsel for Sri.
Lethif. B, learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt. Soumya
- 3 -
NC: 2026:KHC:6978
CRL.P No. 7828 of 2018
HC-KAR
R, learned HCGP for respondent No.1. Perused the materials on
record.
3. In view of the rival contentions urged by learned
counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my
consideration is:
"Whether the petitioners have made out any
grounds to allow the petition and to quash the
criminal proceedings initiated against them?"
My answer to the above point is in the 'partly in the
affirmative' for the following:
REASONS
4. It is the contention of respondent No.2 that she
married petitioner No.1 - accused No.1 on 19.06.2003. They
got the first child on 08.04.2005. Thereafter accused No.1
started ill-treating her both physically and mentally. There is
reference to a petition filed before the Family Court,
Davanagere. However, at the intervention of elders it appears
that the dispute is amicably settled. Thereafter, second child
was born on 10.05.2007 and the third one on 01.11.2008. It is
- 4 -
NC: 2026:KHC:6978
CRL.P No. 7828 of 2018
HC-KAR
stated that accused No.2 is the mother and accused No.3 is the
sister of accused No.1.
5. As per the contentions taken by respondent No.2,
accused No.2 left her along with children in her parents house
and went away, even then he use to visit her house very
frequently and used to ill treat her. In that regard, again she
had approached the Family Court. At the advice of the brothers
of accused No.1, respondent No.2 appears to have withdrawn
the petition filed before the Family Court.
6. Respondent No.2 states that in view of all these
facts and circumstance, she was constrained to stay with her
parents. For some time she was residing separately, but
accused No.1 again came and picked up quarrel with her. She
was assaulted by accused No.1 on 03.07.2017 causing injuries.
However, the complaint was came to be filed on 27.11.2017.
The only allegations against accused Nos.2 and 3 is that they
are mother and sister of accused No.1 and they instigated
accused No.1 to commit the offence. Except this bold and
general allegation no prima facie materials are placed nor there
is any specific allegations against them for having committed
- 5 -
NC: 2026:KHC:6978
CRL.P No. 7828 of 2018
HC-KAR
any of the offence. Therefore, the criminal proceedings initiated
against accused Nos.2 and 3 is liable to be quashed as the
same is registered in abuse of process of law.
7. Petitioner No.1 being accused No.1 is not disputing
his relationship with respondent No.2. It is stated that
respondent No.2 filed the petition seeking maintenance under
Section 125 of Cr.P.C in Crl.Mis.No.96/2006 and the
maintenance amount was awarded to respondent No.2 and her
children. That order has reached finality as the revision filed
before this Court is dismissed. Inspite of that, it is stated that
petitioner No.1 was not paying any maintenance. When
petitioner No.1 is not disputing his relationship with respondent
No.2 and his three children, I do not find any justification for
him to deny the maintenance and abandon them. Moreover,
there are specific allegations made against him regarding
assault, ill-treatment on various occasions. Under such
circumstance, criminal proceedings initiated against petitioner
No.1 - accused No.1 is not liable to be quashed.
8. In view of the above, I answer the above point
'partly in the affirmative' and proceed to pass the following:
- 6 -
NC: 2026:KHC:6978
CRL.P No. 7828 of 2018
HC-KAR
ORDER
i) The petition is allowed-in-part .
ii) The petition against petitioner No.1 - accused
No.1 is dismissed .
iii) The petition against petitioner Nos.2 and 3 -
accused Nos.2 and 3 is allowed .
iv) The criminal proceedings initiated against the
petitioner Nos.2 and 3 - accused No.2 and 3 herein in
CC.No.1687/2018 (Crime No.95/2017 of Women Police
Station, Chitradurga) registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 498(A), 323, 504, 114 read
with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code pending on the file
of the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge,
Chitradurga, is hereby quashed.
SD/-
(M G UMA)
JUDGE
PNV - CT:VS
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10