•1 -1— IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THiS THE 28Th DAY OF JULY 2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRJUSTICE B.V.PINTO CRIMINA1. PETITION No.10378/2011 Between: 1. Laxman S/o.Mallappa Goudi. Age 28 years. 0cc.: Teacher. 2. Mallappa S/o.Bhimappa Goudi, Age 61 years, 0cc.: Agriculture. 3. Sattavwa \V/ o. Mallappa Goudi. Age 55 years, 0cc.: Household work. 4. Channappa S/o.Mallappa Goudi, Age 30 years. 0cc.: Unemployed & KAS passed. 5. Kallappa S/o.Mallappa Goudi, Age 25 years, 0cc.: Student. All are R/o.Duridund, Tq.: Gokak. District Belgaum. . . . Petitioners (By Shri. Ahmed Ali J. Rahimansha. Advocate) And: 1. State of Karnataka. By its Ghatprabha P.S., Ghatprabha P.S. Ghatprabha, Tq.: Gokak, Dist.: Belgaum, By its State P.P.. H.C.C.B.. Dharwad. 41 - 2. Laxamawwa W/o.Laxman Goudi, Age 19 years. 0cc.: Household work. R/o. Duridundi, Tq.: Gokak, District Belgaum. ... Respondents (By Shri. Vinayak S.Kulkarni, H.C.G.P.) This criminal petition is tiled tinder Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash the criminal proceedings of Ghataprabha P.S.. Crime No.253/10. C.C. No.1584/10 pending on the file of the Addi. JMFC. Gokak, u/S.498-A r/w.34 of (PC. This criminal petition coming on for admission this day, the Court made the following: - ORDER This petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.253/2010 of Ghataprabha Police Station, Gokak Taluk, registered for the offence punishable under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. •2. The case is registered on the basis of the complaint given by Smt.Lakkavva, who is the wife of petitioner No.1 and daughter-in-law of petitioner Nos.2 and 3. Petitioner Nos.4 and 5 are the relatives of petitioner No.1. In the complaint, it is stated that the accused were giving ill treatment to the complainant for b -3- bringing cash and gold and they were forcing her not to remain in the house without bringing cash and gold. It is mentioned that the accused were giving both mental and physical harassment. When a panchayat was called. the petitioners were advised by the panchavat to take care of the complainant. Tn spite of that the petitioners were harassing the complainant. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the accused No.5 has passed K.A.S. exam and that it will be harassment to them to appear before the Court and submits that the complaint is false. He has also cited the ruling reported in 2010 Criminal Law Journal page 4303. wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that where there are no specific allegations in the complaint, the proceedings are liable to the quashed. 4. The learned High Court Government Pleader on the other hand submits that the Police have already filed a charge sheet. ln view of the filing of charge sheet. 4 -4- it is deemed that there is prima facie case against the accused and hence, this petition does not merit consideration. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. The petitioners are at liberty to urge all the grounds at the time of seeking for discharge before the trial Court, if they are so advised. All the grounds which are urged herein, are kept open. The petition is dismissed. Sd,. JUDGE Rsh