Karnataka High Court
CRL.P/3905/2019 of SRI. D. MANJUNATH @ MANJUNATH BABU Vs SMT. S. SHOBHA on 9 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010152272019 NC: 2026:KHC:48858 CRL.P No. 3905 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3905 OF 2019 BETWEEN: 1. SRI. D. MANJUNATH @ MANJUNATH BABU, S/O. D.
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3905 OF 2019
BETWEEN:
1.
SRI. D. MANJUNATH @ MANJUNATH BABU,
S/O. D. NARAYANASWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
R/AT AMANIKERE ACHUKATTU,
GANDHINAGARA,
KOLAR CITY-563101.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NARASIMHA MURTHY G.V., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
SMT. S. SHOBHA,
W/O. D.MANJUNATH @ MANJUNATH BABU,
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,
VIJAYAPURA TOWN,
DEVANAHALLI TALUK,
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-563312.
2.
STATE BY WOMEN POLICE STATION, KOLAR,
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENGALURU-560 001.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M. MUNIKRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 – ABSENT; SRI. M. DIVAKAR MADDUR, HCGP FOR R2)
Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE PENDING PROCEEDINGS
IN C.C.NO.243/2019 WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE THE PRL.
SENIOR
CIVIL
JUDGE
AND
CJM
AT
KOLAR,
TAKING
COGNIZANCE UNDER SECTION 498A OF IPC AND UNDER
SECTIONS 3 AND 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.2/State. The learned counsel for respondent No.1/complainant is absent.
2. This petition is filed for quashing the proceedings in C.C.No.243/2019, on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM at Kolar, for the offences punishable under Section 498A of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Based on the complaint, the police have registered the case and investigated the matter and filed the charge-sheet invoking the said offences. The column No.17 of the
HC-KAR
charge-sheet discloses regarding accusation made against the accused.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court the complaint, wherein an allegation is made with regard to receiving the money, demand made and also subsequent demand. But in the charge-sheet, an allegation is made with regard to the demand of additional amount and both are contradictory to each other. It is a false case foisted against the petitioner only with an intention to wreck vengeance against the petitioner for personal grudge in view of the relationship between the husband and wife is strained and hence, it is a case for quashing the proceedings, since there is an abuse of process.
4. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.2/State would contend that during the course of investigation, recorded the statements of CW2 father of the complainant, CW3
HC-KAR
mother of the complainant, senior uncle of the complainant and junior uncle of the complainant as CW4 and CW5 and so also the persons who were present at the time of marriage talk as well as who conducted the panchayath were also cited as CW6 to CW9 and hence, it is a matter of trial.
5. Having taken note of the accusation made in the charge-sheet as well as the contents of the complaint and also the statement recorded by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation, when the complainant was examined and cited as CW1 and the parents and the senior uncle and junior uncle were cited as CW2 to CW5 and also the witnesses who were present in the panchayath also cited as CW6 to CW9, the said statements cannot be considered in the proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and the disputed question of fact and law has to be considered only during the course of trial. When such being the case, I do not find any ground to entertain the petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
HC-KAR
and scope of Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is very limited and hence, not a case for quashing the proceedings.
6. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:
ORDER
The petition is dismissed.
Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE
MD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17