1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BENCH DATED THIS THE 19 TH DAY OF AUGUST 2015 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP D.WAINGANKAR CRIMINAL PETITION.NO.100600/2015

BETWEEN

1. NEELAVVA W/O MALLIKARJUN , AGE:35 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O , TQ. NAVALGUND, DIST. DHARWAD.

2. DEEPA W/O BASAVARAJ ITIGATTI, AGE:28 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O NAVALUR, TQ & DIST. DHARWAD

3. MANJULA D/O BASAPA MUGAD, AGE:30 YEARS, OCC. PVT. WORK, R/O KELAGERI, TQ & DIST. DHARWAD.

4. IRAPPA S/O BHARAMAPPA MUGAD, AGE:25 YEARS, OCC. INDIAN ARMY SERVICE, R/O , TQ.DHARWAD.

5. MAHADEVAPA S/O KALLPPA MUGAD, AGEL50 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O KELGERI, TQ & DIST. DHARWAD.

6. BASAPPA S/O KALLAPPA MUGAD, AGE:55 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O KELGERI, TQ & DIST. DHARWAD.

7. DHARAPPA S/O FAKKIRAPPA AJAGONDAWAR, AGE:52 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, 2

R/O KELGERI, TQ & DIST. DHARWAD.

..... PETITIONERS

(BY SRI PRAVEEN JOSHI, ADV. FOR SRI R H ANGADI, ADV.)

AND

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, (THE DHARWAD SUB-URBAN POLICE STATION) R/BY ITS SPP, DHARWAD BENCH, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD.

2. SAVITA W/O MANJUNATH BALAGANUR @ KAMATAR, AGE:30 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O ALAGAWADI, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT: C/O RAJANGOUDA MALLANAGOUDA TIMMANAGOUDAR DENA BANK COLONY, BASAVA NILAY, KUMARESHWAR NAGAR, DHARWAD.

..... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI SHIVAPRABHU HIREMATH, AGA FOR R-1 SRI SRINAND A. PACHCHAPURE, ADV. FOR R-2)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO ALLOW THE PETITION AND QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS PENDING IN RESPECT OF PETITIONERS IN DHARWAD SUB-URBAN P.S. CRIME NO.61/2014 FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 498-A, 494, 504, 109 R/W SEC. 149 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE & PRL. JMFC COURT, IN C.C.NO.182/2015.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: 3

O R D E R

Petitioners who are arrayed as accused in C.C.No.182/2015 on the file of Prl. Civil Judge and Prl. J.M.F.C., Dharwad have filed this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings as against them.

2. One Smt. Savita Kom Manjunath Balaganur @ Kamatar filed a complaint before the Sub-Urban Police Station, Dharwad alleging that she was married to one Manjunath on 16.11.2008 as per

Hindu rites and rituals at Ulavi Channabasaveshwara Temple,

Dharwad. She was presented with 10 tolas gold and a cash amount of

Rs.2,00,000/- at the time of marriage which was performed by spending about Rs.4,00,000/-. After the marriage, she led marital life in matrimonial house. Out of the wedlock, a son by name

Adarshgowda was born. Thereafter, the husband and in-laws started harassing and ill-treating her for the sake of dowry. The husband was working in Military at Raigad. At times, he used to come to Dharwad on leave. Accordingly, in the month of February 2014, when he came to Dharwad on leave, he along with his mother Rudravva, 4

Bharamappa Kallappa Mugad, Neelavva Kom. Mallikarjun Tadahal,

Deepa Kom. Basavaraj Itigatti, Irappa Bharamappa Mugad,

Mahadevappa Kallappa Mugad, Basappa Kallappa Mugad and

Dhareppa Ajagondanavar along with one Manjula, daughter of

Bharamappa Mugad went to Someshwara Temple at Sogala,

Bailgongal Taluk where the husband of the complainant married

Manjula during the subsistence of his marriage with the complainant. on 22.04.2014. She came to know about the second marriage, from one Ningappa Sahadevappa Hadapad on 01.03.2014. Her enquiry was also confirmed that her husband contacted second marriage with

Manjula. As such, she lodged a complaint which came to be registered in Crime No.61/2014 for the aforesaid offences. During the course of investigation, all these persons were arrested and they were remanded to the judicial custody. The police after investigation filed chargesheet against these petitioners and others. The contention of the petitioners is that they are neither related to Manjunath nor to

Manjula the so-called second wife of Manjunath and they have been 5

unnecessarily dragged into this case. Hence, they have filed this petition to quash the proceedings as against them.

3. Petition is opposed by the respondent No.2-complainant on the ground that the police after investigation have also found the role played by these persons as they attended the marriage and instigated Manjunath, husband of complainant to go for second marriage during the subsistence of the first marriage. It is further contended that upon investigation, chargesheet came to be filed against these persons and if at all the petitioners are innocent, they can file an application for their discharge before the Court where the case is pending. For these reasons, the learned counsel sought for rejection of the petition.

4. Heard both the learned counsel. Perused the records.

5. The averments made out in the complaint filed by the complainant would go to show that these petitioners along with

Manjunath and Manjula went to Someshwara Temple at Sogala where

Manjunath married Manjula on 22.04.2014. Except this bald 6

allegation, there is no other material to speak about their involvement in the so-called second marriage. There are no other allegations against them regarding ill treatment or harassment meted out to the complainant. Be that as it may, the police after investigation have filed a chargesheet. It is a case of warrant trial. The petitioners have an opportunity to seek their discharge before framing charges. It is for these reasons, I pass the following

ORDER

Petition is rejected giving liberty to the petitioners to file an application for their discharge before the Magistrate before whom the case is pending.

In view of the rejection of the petition, I.A.No.1/2015 does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, it is dismissed.

Sd/- JUDGE

Naa