Karnataka HC Refuses To Quash Alleged Home-Abuse Case After Charges Framed, Says Civil Dispute Alone Is No Ground

The petitioner, accused No. 2, sought to quash proceedings in C.C. No. 127 of 2020, arising from a complaint alleging that he and others entered the complainant’s house, quarrelled with and abused her, caused hurt, and threatened her on 31 October 2019.

The charge-sheet alleged offences under Sections 341, 352, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner argued that he was falsely implicated amid a family property dispute and relied on the complainant’s failure to appear at trial.

The State opposed quashing, noting that charges had been framed and the case was set for trial.

Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, provides the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice.

The Court stated that, once charges have been framed and a matter is set down for trial, the High Court should ordinarily be reluctant to interfere under this provision unless exceptional circumstances justify it.

Disputed questions of fact are not to be determined in such proceedings; the complainant’s attendance is a matter for the trial court to address in accordance with law.

The Court referred generally to decisions of the Supreme Court but did not identify any specific precedent.

The charge-sheet material alleged that the petitioner participated in the incident, and the trial court had framed charges after considering that material.

The petitioner’s arguments about the complainant’s non-appearance and the parties’ alleged civil dispute did not establish exceptional circumstances: the former could be addressed by the trial court, and no material substantiated the alleged pending civil suit.

The petitioner’s claim of false implication raised disputed factual matters unsuitable for resolution under Section 528 BNSS.

Any pending interlocutory applications were also dismissed.