SMT. FARIDA BEGAUM vs STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60961
CRL.RP No. 1501 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010650332026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
ND
DATED THIS THE 2 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE GEETHA K.B.
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1501 OF 2026
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. FARIDA BEGAUM
AGE 70 YEARS,
W/O. LATE S.A. SAMI ULLA,
R/O. 21/38, 1ST CROSS,
NEAR VYALIKAVAL PLAY GROUND,
MALLESHWARAM,
BENGALURU - 560 003.
2.
BASHEERA BEGAUM,
W/O. PARIVIZ PASHA
AGE 42 YEARS,
R/O. NO. 55, 4TH MAIN ROAD,
LAKSHMAIAH BLOCK, GANGA NAGAR,
R.T. NAGAR POST, BENGALURU - 560 032.
3. TASIN BEGAUM
W/O JAVID PASHA
AGE 50 YEARS
R/O NO.14, 15TH CROSS
7TH MAIN ROAD, NEAR RAMA TEMPLE
PADARAYANAPURA
BENGALURU - 560 026.
4. MOSINA BEGAUM,
W/O. NAYAZ AHMED,
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60961
CRL.RP No. 1501 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010650332026
AGE 48 YEARS,
NO. 4, 2ND FLOOR, 5TH MAIN,
RAHAMATHNAGAR, R.T. NAGAR POST,
BENGALURU - 560 032.
PRESENTLY R/AT 38, 21/38
1ST MAIN ROAD, VYALIKAVAL
MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU - 560 003
BENGALURU CITY, KARNATAKA.
5.
TAHERA BEGUM,
W/O. MOHAMMED NIZAMUDDIN,
AGE 40 YEARS,
R/O. 23/11, 1ST MAIN, 1ST "F" CROSS,
NEAR BHASKAR BAKERY, GANGANAGAR,
R.T.NAGAR POST, BENGALURU - 560 032.
6. TOUSIP ULLA,
S/O. S.A. SAMI ULLA,
AGE 43 YEARS,
R/O. 21/38, 1ST CROSS,
NEAR VYALIKAVAL PLAY GROUND,
MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU - 560 003.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. UDAYA KUMAR N, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY HEBBAL POLICE STATION, BENGALURU,
REPRESENTED BY LEARNED STATE PUBLIC
PROSECUTER, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60961
CRL.RP No. 1501 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010650332026
2. IFA USMA,
W/O AMIN ULLA,
AGE 31 YEARS,
R/O. NO. 45, 3RD CROSS,
BHUVANESHWARI NAGARA,
MAIN ROAD, CHOLANAYAKANAHALLI,
R.T.NAGARA POST, HEBBAL,
BENGALURU - 560 032.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. VINAY MAHADEVAIAH, HCGP FOR R1;
VIDE ORDER DATED 29.10.2026, SERVICE OF NOTICE IN
RESPECT OF R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S. 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 07.08.2026
PASSED ON DISCHARGE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ACCUSED
NO.2 TO 7 IN CC NO.24254/2023 PENDING ON THE FILE OF
THE LD VIII ADDL.CJM BENGALURU CITY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE GEETHA K.B.
ORAL ORDER
Even though the petition is at the stage of hearing
on IA No.2/2026, with the consent of both sides, heard on
merits.
2. This is the revision petition filed under Section
397 read with 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
(in short 'Cr.P.C.) by the revision petitioners/accused
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60961
CRL.RP No. 1501 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010650332026
Nos.2 to 7 challenging the order of dismissal of the order
dated 07.08.2026 passed on discharge application in
C.C.No.24254/2023 on the file of the VIII Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru City.
3. The parties would be referred with their ranks, as
they were before the Tribunal for the sake of convenience
and clarity.
4. The Hebbala Police Station has filed charge-sheet
against accused Nos.1 to 7 alleging the offences
punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34
IPC. Accused No.1 is the husband, accused No.2 is
mother- in-law and other accused Nos.3 to 6 are sister-in-
law and accused No.7 is brother-in-law of the de facto
complainant.
5. The sum and substance of the charge-sheet and
its annexures is that after the marriage of de facto
complainant with accused No.1 that has taken place on
16.05.2016, initially de facto complainant and the accused
st
No.1 were residing in the house No.21/38, 1 Cross,
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60961
CRL.RP No. 1501 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010650332026
Vayalikaval, Malleshwaram, Bengaluru City with accused
Nos.1 to 7. There were petty disputes between them and
settlement talks (raji panchayaths). During December-
2022, the de facto complainant, her husband started
residing separately in a rented house at House No.45, 3rd
Cross, Bhuvaneshwari Nagara Main Road,
Cholanayakanahalli, R.T.Nagara Post, Hebbal, Bengaluru,
within the jurisdiction of Hebbala Police Station. At that
time, accused No.1 was not going to his job, when de
facto complainant questioned him, he was assaulting her,
abusing her, treating her with cruelty both physically and
mentally and also threatened on her life with dire
consequences. Hence, the charge-sheet is filed against
accused Nos.1 to 7.
6. The learned counsel for revision petitioner Sri
Udaya Kumar N would submit that there are no allegations
against the present revision petitioners in the complaint or
in the statements of witnesses. Furthermore, the revision
petitioners were not residing with the complainant as per
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60961
CRL.RP No. 1501 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010650332026
complaint averments itself. However, these facts were not
at all appreciated by the trial Court. Hence, prayed for
allowing the revision petition.
7. The learned HCGP representing the State would
submit that there are some minor allegations against the
accused No. 2 to 6 in the charge-sheet and annexures to
it. Considering these aspects, the trial Court rightly
dismissed the discharge application. The facts alleged in
the present revision petition requires trial. Hence, prayed
for dismissal of the revision petition.
8. On careful perusal of the averments made in the
complaint, in the statement of witnesses i.e. the father,
mother and uncle of de facto complainant, it is stated that
initially there were assault and abuse to the complainant
in respect of small petty quarrels; during December-2022,
de facto complainant started residing with her husband
(accused No.1) in a separate house and then accused No.1
was not going to job and not treating the de facto
complainant and her children in a proper manner and in
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60961
CRL.RP No. 1501 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010650332026
that regard, he was assaulting her, abusing her in filthy
language and threatening on her life with dire
consequences. Except these averments made against
accused No.1, there is no specific averments made against
accused Nos.2 to 7 to attract any of the offences under
Section 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 IPC. There is no
allegation of demand of dowry and harassment for it. The
only allegation is assault by accused No.1. There is no
specific allegation attracting the offence under Section
498-A IPC against the relatives of the husband of accused
No.1 i.e. against accused Nos.2 to 7.
9. Prima-facie no medical or any other document is
produced to substantiate the contention of the de facto
complainant along with charge-sheet in respect of other
offences under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC.
10. In this regard, the learned counsel for revision
petitioner places reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Apex
Court in Prasanta Kumar Dhar & Anr. vs. The State of
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60961
CRL.RP No. 1501 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010650332026
1
West Bengal & Anr. at paragraph Nos.25 to 27 held as
follows:
"25. We find that the allegations made and
investigation carried out do not reveal details as to
any threats made by the appellants to the
complainant, her family, their property or their
reputation. It is pertinent to note that the
complainant states that her signing of the document
stating that she has received all of her streedhan
and valuables back was made under duress and
coercion and intimidation of the first appellant and
her husband. However, the only material to
demonstrate any coercive or intimidating behaviour
of the first appellant is her own complaint and the
statements of her parents recorded under Section
161 Cr.P.C. There is no other evidence/material on
record to implicate the first Appellant as regards the
allegations of coercion or intimidation at the
complainant's parental house.
26. Finding reliance on Bhajan Lal (supra), Arti
Mehta (supra) and Geddam Jhansi (supra), we are of
the view that the allegations levelled against the
1
2026 INSC 1087 decided on 05.10.2026
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60961
CRL.RP No. 1501 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010650332026
present appellants are not specific, cogent and
credible. They do not attribute an overt or specific
act to either appellant. Neither the complaint nor
the investigation reveals any independent material
that shows that the appellants as the in-laws of the
complainant committed any of the offences
mentioned in the FIR or the chargesheet. The
allegations against the appellants for the demands
for dowry, of criminal intimidation and cruelty find
no supporting material in the FIR or the chargesheet
submitted after the investigation. The oral
allegations are devoid of any supporting material or
witnesses, which renders the allegations of the
complainant against the appellants without any legal
basis to continue the legal proceedings against the
appellants.
27. Specific allegations of cruelty, harassment
and dowry demands have been made against the
husband of the complainant, who was neither a
party to the proceedings before the High Court, nor
here. Hence, we are not dealing with the allegations
against the husband."
11. In the aforesaid judgment, while quashing the
complaint against the relatives of the husband, the Hon'ble
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60961
CRL.RP No. 1501 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010650332026
Apex Court while dealing with the offence under Section
498-A, 406, 506 and 323 IPC has made the aforesaid
observation. In the instant case also, there is no specific
allegation made against the present revision petitioners
either in the complaint or in the statements of witnesses
under Section 161 Cr.P.C. To consider the discharge
application, the Court has to look into only the averments
made in the charge-sheet and its annexures and not on
any other documents.
12. In the instant case as discussed above, the
averments made in the charge-sheet and its annexures do
not establish any of the specific allegations against present
revision petitioners for the offences punishable under
Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 r/w 34 IPC. All the
allegations against present revision petitioners are very
vague; the date, time and place of any incident is not
narrated; the allegations are only against accused
No.1/husband. However, the trial Court has not considered
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60961
CRL.RP No. 1501 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010650332026
these aspects in an appropriate manner and dismissed the
discharge application which requires interference.
13. When there is no allegation in the charge-sheet
and its annexures and when it is not at all examined by
the trial Court in an appropriate manner, interference on
the aforesaid judgment by this Court is very much
required under revisional jurisdiction.
14. Hence, this Court passes the following:
ORDER
i. Criminal Revision petition is allowed ;
ii. The revision petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 6 are
discharged for the offences punishable under Sections
498-A, 323, 504 and 506 r/w 34 IPC by setting aside the
order on discharge application dated 07.8.2026 passed in
C.C.No.24254/2023 on the file of the VIII Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru City;
iii. The bail bonds of revision petitioners stand
cancelled;
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60961
CRL.RP No. 1501 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010650332026
iv. The trial court is directed not to be influenced by the
observations made in this order while proceeding against
accused No.1
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
(GEETHA K.B.)
JUDGE
SSD
List No.: 2 Sl No.: 20