High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri B Balakrishna vs State Of Karnataka on 6 September, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Sri B Balakrishna vs State Of Karnataka on 6 September, 2010
Author: Subhash B.Adi
-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 67" DAY OF' SEPTEMBER, 2010
BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRJUSTECE SUBHASH IE3 ADI 

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4380/2010;' 

BETWEEN:

1.

Sri. B.E-alakrishna
S/ o B.A.BasaVaiah
Aged about 32 years
Door No.869, 143* Cross
Mahalakshmi Layout; 9
Bangalore – 560 086. ., *

2. Smt. Jayamma I ”

W/o B.A.Basa’:rai”a–h __
Aged about 61 3:5féa1’s~. W 2
Door No.369_,.””14fl.T’CroSs’f–./A E.’

Maha1akshnii”‘Légyou:””VJ’-
Bangaiore e 56.0 0.86.

3. Sr”i_E3.A.Ba’sayaiah
S,/.%o B.’A.BasavaiAah A.

Agédaaoout 78 years
. “Door_No.86§., 1401 Cross
‘ Mai’: Layout
~. B«angaio1fe__ -* 560 056.

V4. Saraawathi

W/o Lakshmikanth
* Aged about 35 years
, Door No.48?/A, 10th Cross
Mathikere,
Bangalore — 560 056. ….PE’,TI’l’IONERS

{By M / S Tomy Sebastian Assts., Advs.)

1. State of Karnataka by
Mahalakshmi Layout
Police Station, Bangalore.

Smt. Sridevi

W/o Sri. Balakrishna
Aged about 23 years
C / o Vagdevi

No.36, Shankara Park
Shankarapurarn
Bangalore — 560 004.

{By Sri.Satish R.Giv.-fi_i;~-.}_§lCGl7’~for R1)f”

THIS CRIMINAL PETITIGN Is FILED .UNDER SECTION 482
CR.P.C PRAYING THAT THIS HO1\I’.BLE c;cURIj’MA:: BE PLEASED TO
QUASH TI-IE FIR IN CR.NO.159/150 0E”MAf£A..LZ%K;SHlx’II LAYOUT P.S..,
BANGALORE, PENDING oI\I~– FILE OF ” IV AcMM.,
BANGALORE. , ,

THIS c¥onIIN–G”-ON ‘EGRORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE I_’HE’F:oLI_,oWI*NG’:-.y__ . ‘

d–b§RDER

Petitioner has callledvin question the proceedings in Crime

;:’No;.; registeredwd by Mahalakshmi Layout police,

Ba11ga.l_ore’ 4vhonV:’.5.6.20lO for an offence punishable under

“‘vsectIong__V49SA 506 r/W 34 of the IPC.

A 2. CorI_tplainant is Wife of the first accused. She has filed a

it against the husband, father–n–law, mother–in–law and
“‘si;ster5–in–law interalia alleging harassment and abuse in

it ‘ ~ .connection with dowry.

It A .. 3.. .’REs_’R’oNIiEN*I’s:

proceedings,

-3-

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that, the

husband had filed .M.C.Petition No.2’74l/2008 seeking

restitution of conjugal right and the said petition

directing the restitution of conjugal rights. In this .regard:,’ V’

the accused No.1 had gone to the houseof

complainant in turn has filed the

husband, on which proceedingsv”‘—.1iaVeA”been_ “land ” it

statement of the complainant andm_..thA”e..p’etitionler .No.ml:§accused

No.1 have been recorded, wherein admitted that, she

has left the matrimonial prior to filing of
the complaint statement is also
recorded thatmhe, of the complainant.
Despite oi: gleloimplaint is filed for the offence

punishable under séctims 4§e,A; dsos r/W 34 of the IPC.

e_is se{fei’ance of the relationship and if the wife is

residing -Vseparatelf for last two years, harassment and demand

‘ ” of doivrgfdoes nay: arise.

5. Government Pleader submits that, this matter

beconsidered by the police which is investigating the case.

G6. In these circumstances, I deem it proper to direct the

police to look into all the allegations and also earlier complaint.

including the proceedings in M.C.Petition

aéjiié

-4-

No.2741/2008. If there is no truth in the allegation in the
complaint, poiice shall file appropriate report.

With the above observation, petition stands dispoéed ,

{AP/_