Karnataka HC Quashes Proceedings Against Husband’s Friend, Says Specific Abuse Allegation Surfaced Only In Police Statement; Husband’s Case Continues

The complainant filed a private complaint alleging, among other things, that her husband (Accused No. 1) demanded money and gold at the time of marriage, assaulted and abused her, and had an illicit relationship.

The complaint also alleged that Accused Nos. 1 and 2 threatened her; the police investigated and filed a charge sheet in C.C. No. 2350/2020.

The petitioners sought to quash the charge sheet under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The State relied on the complainant’s further statement, which attributed abuse to Accused No. 2, while the petitioners argued that the allegations against both accused were general and omnibus.

Section 482 CrPC empowers the High Court to quash criminal proceedings in an appropriate case.

The Court considered the principles in Sivaraman Nair and Others v. State of Kerala and Another, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 672, and Dara Lakshmi Narayana and Others v. State of Telangana and Another, (2025) 3 SCC 735: vague and omnibus allegations, without specific acts attributed to an accused, may justify quashing proceedings.

The Court also noted that Sections 504 and 506 IPC had been invoked against Accused No. 2.

The complaint attributed specific conduct to Accused No. 1, including demands for money and gold, physical assault, and abuse; the Court therefore held that the cited precedents on omnibus allegations did not justify quashing the case against him.

By contrast, the original complaint only included Accused No. 2 in a general allegation of threat.

The allegation that he also abused the complainant appeared in her further statement during investigation, and the Court regarded it as an improvement; it also noted that the complainant had not stated that the witnesses said to have seen the incident were present.

The Court accordingly found the material insufficient to sustain the proceedings against Accused No. 2.

Proceedings in C.C. No. 2350/2020 were quashed as against Accused No. 2, while the petition was rejected as against Accused No. 1.