- 1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 14 th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP D.WAINGANKAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101051 OF 2014 c/w CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100593 OF 2014
CRL.P.NO.101051/2014
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. AMBIKA @ AMRUTA D/O. CHANDRABHANU NAIK AGE 22 YEARS OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O. AMBEDKAR NAGAR, SADALGA TQ:CHIKODI DIST:BELGAUM
2. SRI. CHANDRABHANU NAIK AGE 48 YEARS OCC:COOLIE R/O. AMBEDKAR NAGAR, SADALGA TQ:CHIKODI DIST:BELGAUM
3. SMT. MAHADEVI W/O. CHANDRABHANU NAIK AGE 38 YEARS OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK - 2 -
R/O. AMBEDKAR NAGAR, SADALGA TQ:CHIKODI DIST:BELGAUM
4. SMT. SUMAN KERABA KAMBLE AGE MAJOR OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O. HUPARI TQ:HATAKANGALA DIST:KOLHAPUR. ... PETITIONERS
(By Sri: MOHAN A. HIREKODI, ADV., )
AND:-
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD.
2. SMT. REKHA SWAPNIL KAMBLE AGE 33 YEARS OCC:SCHOOL TEACHER R/O. MANGUR TAL: CHIKODI, DIST:BELGAUM. NOW RESIDING AT BAHUD EDUCATION SOCIETY NEW ENGLISH SCHOOL SORADI TQ:JATT, DIST:SANGLI MAHARASHTRA STATE. ……RESPONDENTS
(By Sri:SHIVAPRABHU S. HIREMATH, AGA FOR R1 M.B. GUNDAVADE, ADV.,FOR R2) ------3 -
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO QUSH THE ORDER DATED 14.6.2013 OF REGISTERING THE CRIMINAL CASE IN P.C.NO.212/2012 AGAINST THE PETITIONERS FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 494, 143, 109, 120(B) R/W 149 OF IPC AND ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS AND ALSO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.1036/2013 (P.C.NO.212/2012) ON THE FILE OF THE I-ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND JMFC COURT, CHIKODI, INSOFAR AS THE SAME RELATE TO THE PETITIONERS, AS THE SAME BEING TOTALLY ILLEGAL AND NOT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW.
CRL.P.NO.100593 OF 2014
1. SRI. SHRIKANT APPAJI KAMBLE AGE 63 YEARS OCC:RETIRED TEACHER R/O. MANGUR TQ:CHIKODI DIST:BELGAUM
2. SRI. NANA SUTURE AGE 60 YEARS OCC:AGRICULTURE R/O. AMBEDKAR NAGAR, SADALGA TQ:CHIKODI DIST:BELGAUM.
3. SMT. CHAYA NANA SUTURE AGE 53 YEARS OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O. MANGUR, TQ:CHIKODI DIST:BELGAUM. - 4 -
4. SRI. VASANT GOVIND VARALE AGE 65 YEARS OCC:AGRICULTURE R/O. MANGUR, TQ:CHIKODI DIST:BELGAUM.
5. SRI. PRASHANT SHRIKANT KAMBLE AGE 32 YEARS OCC:TEACHER R/O. MANGUR, TQ:CHIKODI DIST:BELGAUM.
6. SMT. PRACHI PRASHANT KAMBLE AGE 25 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE R/O. MANGUR, TQ:CHIKODI DIST:BELGAUM.
7. SRI. HEMALATA SHRIKANT KAMBLE W/O. SHIVAJI ANAND SHITOLE AGE 30 YEARS OCC:TEACHER R/O. PANGERI-A, TQ:CHIKODI DIST:BELGAUM. ……PETITIONERS
(BY SRI:RAMACHANDRA MALI, ADV.,)
AND:-
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 5 -
DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD.
2. SMT. REKHA SWAPNIL KAMBLE AGE 33 YEARS OCC:SCHOOL TEACHER R/O. MANGUR TAL: CHIKODI, DIST:BELGAUM. NOW RESIDING AT BAHUD EDUCATION SOCIETY NEW ENGLISH SCHOOL SORADI TQ:JATT, DIST:SANGLI MAHARASHTRA STATE. ……RESPONDENTS
(By Sri:SHIVAPRABHU S. HIREMATH, AGA FOR R1 M.B. GUNDAVADE, ADV.,FOR R2) ------
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 14.6.2013 OF REGISTERING THE CRIMINAL CASE IN P.C.NO.212/2012 AGAINST THE PETITIONERS FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/Ss. 143, 494, 109, 120(B) R/W 149 OF IPC AND ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS AND ALSO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.1036/2013 (P.C.NO.212/2012) ON THE FILE OF THE I-ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND JMFC COURT, CHIKODI, INSOFAR AS THE SAME RELATE TO THE PETITIONERS, AS THE SAME BEING TOTALLY ILLEGAL AND NOT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: - 6 -
ORDER
Both these petitions are filed under Section 482
Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioners in both the petitioners in
C.C.No.1036/2013 pending on the file of I Addl. Civil
Judge(Jr.Dn.) & JMFC, Chikodi.
2. One Smt. Rekha, filed a private complaint
before the I Addl. Civil Judge(Jr.Dn.) & JMFC,
Chikodi. It is alleged in the complaint that she is the
legally wedded wife of accused No.1, her marriage was
solmenised with accused No.1 on 26.3.1995 at
Mangur village, Chikodi Taluk as per their customs.
Out of the wedlock, two children were born by name
Prashik and Kunal. For sometime, they led happy
married life. Thereafter, relationship between the
husband and wife became strained. She was
neglected, deserted and refused to maintain by her - 7 -
husband. She filed a petition for grant of maintenance. Inspite of best efforts made by the elders, the relationship did not improve. Finally, the husband filed a petition for decree of divorce.
3. It is the case of the complainant that during the subsistence of her marriage with accused No.1, he contacted second marriage with a girl by name N.
Ambika. After coming to know of the same, she filed a complaint for the offences punishable under Sections
494, 109, 120B r/w 149 IPC against her husband and her inlaws (in Crl.P.No.101051/2014). Since the complaint lacks necessary ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 494 IPC, accused Nos.2 to
13 have filed these petitions to quash the proceedings as against them. - 8 -
I have heard both the learned counsel appearing for the accused-petitioners and the counsel appearing for the respondent- State and the complainant.
Perused the records and the averments made out in the complaint.
4. Though it is stated that accused No.1 had contacted second marriage with one N. Ambika during the subsistence of her marriage with accused No.1,
when, where and on which date the second marriage had taken place finds no place in the complaint. The role played by these petitioner Nos.2 to 13 is also not specified, except that they are residing with accused
No.1. It is also seen that the so-called second wife N.
Ambika is stated to be daughter of uncle of accused
No.1. The ceremonies are also not spelt out in the complaint. It goes without saying that in a case of this nature, not only the second marriage, even the first - 9 -
marriage has to be established. In the said background, if we peruse the averments made out in the complaint and the sworn statement recorded by the Magistrate, necessary ingredients to constitute an offence punishable under Section 494 IPC are missing. Under such circumstances, the Magistrate
was not right in issuing process against these petitioners who are arrayed as accused Nos.2 to 5 and
7 to 13. Moreover, the marriage between the complainant and accused No.1 is dissolved by a competent court by a decree of divorce on 14.12.2012.
Therefore, having regard to the averments made out
in the complaint and the sworn statement recorded by
the Magistrate, I am of the considered opinion that
ingredients of Section 494 IPC are not made out
atleast as against these petitioners. Hence, I pass the
following:- - 10 -
ORDER
The petitions are allowed. Proceedings in
C.C.No.1036/2013 on the file of I Addl. Civil
Judge(Jr.Dn.) & JMFC Court, Chikodi against these petitioners are hereby quashed.
Sd/- JUDGE
*mn/-