ADVERTISEMENT
Karnataka High Court
Sri Karan Kumar M N vs State Of Karnataka on 7 April, 2026
1 Crl.P.No.201466 OF 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 201466 OF 2025
(482(Cr.PC)/528 (BNSS))
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. KARAN KUMAR M.N.
S/O LATE MAHANTESH VIRUPAKSHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
R/AT NO.36, 1ST FLOOR,
GALAXY GARDEN,
KEMBATHALLI ROAD
PILLAGANA HALLI
GOTTIGERE POST,
BANNERGHATTA ROAD CROSS,
BENGALURU-560083
2. KUM. SAPNA M. NASHI
D/O M.V. NASHI
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/AT NO. 36, 1ST FLOOR
GALAXY GARDEN,
KEMBATHALLI ROAD
PILLAGANA HALLI
GOTTIGERE POST,
BANNERGHATTA ROAD CROSS,
BENGALURU-560083
3. SMT. SUHASINI CHETAN
W/O CHETAN KUMAR K.P
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
R/AT NO.3 KH NO.316/10,
DEVI NIYALA,
BEHIND JAYALAKSHMI COMPLEX
MAGADI MAIN ROAD,
VRUSHABHAVATHINAGAR
2 Crl.P.No.201466 OF 2025
KAMAKSHIPALYA
BENGALURU-560079.
4. SRI. CHETAN KUMAR K.P
S/O PUTTAIAH R
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/AT NO.3 KH NO.316/10,
DEVI NIYALA,
BEHIND JAYALAKSHMI COMPLEX
MAGADI MAIN ROAD,
VRUSHABHAVATHINAGAR
KAMAKSHIPALYA
BENGALURU-560079.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SANTOSH PATIL AND
SRI. SIDDHARTH SUMAN ADVOCATES)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KALABURAGI CITY WOMEN P.S
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
KALABURAGI-585103.
2. SMT. AMBUJA
W/O KARAN NASHI
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
R/O GOTTIGERE, J.P NAGAR
BENGALURU, NOW R/O
BHAGAVATI NAGAR,
BEHIND SANGAMESHWAR HOSPITAL
KALABURAGI-585102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. GOPALKRISHNA B. YADAV, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. SANJAY A PATIL ADV., FOR R2)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/SEC. 482 OF CR.P.C (OLD)
U/SEC. 528 OF BNSS (NEW), PRAYING TO I) QUASH THE FIR
3 Crl.P.No.201466 OF 2025
AND COMPLAINT AT ANNEXURE 'A' AND 'A1' IN CRIME
NO.36/2025 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 POLICE
FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 498A, 85,
115(2), 351, 352 R/W 3(5) OF BNS, SECTION 3 AND 4 OF THE
DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT, WHICH IS NOW PENDING BEFORE
THE I ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL (J.D.) AND J.M.F.C.,
GULBARGA; II) QUASH THE CHARGE-SHEET AT ANNEXURE 'B'
IN CRIME NO.36/2025 REGISTERED BY THE RESPODENT NO.1
POLICE FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS
85, 115(2), 351, 352, 49 R/W 3(5) OF BNS, SECTION 3 AND 4
OF THE DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT, WHICH IS NOW PENDING
BEFORE THE I ADDITIONAL J.M.F.C., KALABURAGI IN C.C.
NO.5239/2025; III) QUASH THE ORDER DATED 30.06.2025
TAKING COGNIZANCE AT ANNEXURE 'C' IN CRIME NO.36/2025
REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 POLICE FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 85, 115(2), 351, 352
R/W 3(5) OF BNS, SECTION 3 AND 4 OF THE DOWRY
PROHIBITION ACT, WHICH IS NOW PENDING BEFORE THE I
ADDITIONAL J.M.F.C., KALABURAGI IN C.C NO.5239/2025.
THIS PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED
FOR ORDERS ON 25.03.2026, COMING ON FOR
"PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDERS" THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE
THE FOLLOWING:
4 Crl.P.No.201466 OF 2025
CAV ORDER
The petitioners have filed this petition under Section
528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for
short, 'BNSS, 2023') seeking following reliefs:
(i) "Quash the FIR and complaint at Annexure 'A'
and 'A1' in Crime No.36/2025 registered by the
respondent No.1 police for the offences
punishable under Sections 498A, 85, 115(2),
351, 352 r/w 3(5) of BNS, Section 3 and 4 of
the Dowry Prohibition Act, which is now
pending before the I Additional Chief Judicial
(J.D.) and J.M.F.C., Gulbarga, in so far as the
petitioners are concerned;
(ii) Quash the charge-sheet at Annexure 'B' in
Crime No.36/2025 registered by the
respondent No.1 police for the offences
punishable under Sections 85, 115(2), 351,
352, 49 r/w 3(5) of BNS, Section 3 and 4 of the
Dowry Prohibition Act, which is now pending
before the I Additional JMFC, Kalaburagi in C.C.
No.5239/2025 in so far as the petitioners are
concerned;
(iii) Quash the order dated 30.06.2025 taking
cognizance at Annexure 'C' in Crime
No.36/2025 registered by the respondent No.1
police for the offences punishable under
Sections 85, 115(2), 351, 352 r/w 3(5) of BNS,
Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act,
which is now pending before the I Additional
JMFC,, Kalaburagi in C.C No.5239/2025 in so
far as the petitioners are concerned
(iv) Pass such other order(s) as this Hon'ble Court
may deem fit under the facts and
circumstances of the present case in the ends
of justice."
5 Crl.P.No.201466 OF 2025
2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners would submit that the petitioners are
innocents, they have not committed any offence as alleged
against them. Respondent No.1-police have colluded with
respondent No.2-complainant and they have falsely
implicated the petitioners with a malicious intent to harass
the petitioners and to make wrongful gains. It is submitted
that the very registration of FIR and the consequent filing
of the charge-sheet and order of taking cognizance are
contrary to law and wholly against the well-established
principles of law. Thus, criminal proceedings are liable to
be quashed.
3. It is further submitted that, the learned
Magistrate without application of judicious mind, has taken
cognizance against the accused for the alleged offences.
That there is a prima facie case made out against the
petitioners for the alleged commission of offences. There is
an inordinate delay in lodging the complaint, which is not
properly explained by the prosecution. The Investigating
Officer has not conducted preliminary enquiry before
6 Crl.P.No.201466 OF 2025
registration of this case, which is violation of the judgment
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lalita
Kumari v. State of U.P. reported in (2014) 2 SCC 1.
4. Respondent No.2 has claimed that the
petitioners have demanded dowry from her parents and
her which is completely unfounded and finds no substance.
Further, he would submit that in Uttara Kannada a custom
of writing 'Yadi' is followed wherein, the groom side and
bride side write down details of the gifts being exchanged
by both sides and which is signed/attested by elders from
both sides which further proves of the allegations being
concocted only for the purpose of initiating criminal
proceedings against the petitioners.
5. On perusal of the said document, it is evident
that no mention of gift/alleged dowry has been made in
relation to the allegations made in the complaint of the
petitioners having demanded a dowry and that respondent
No.2 and her family fulfilled the petitioners' demand by
handing over 10 grams of gold, 75 tola silver articles and
Rs.5,00,000/- in cash which is further signed and duly
7 Crl.P.No.201466 OF 2025
attested by the uncles of both respondent No.2 and
petitioner No.1, which in itself indicates of the ill-motive of
respondent No.2 in making such false and treacherous
allegations against the petitioners.
6. On bare reading of the complaint, respondent
No.2 has stated that unable to bear the alleged
harassment meted out by the petitioners, she left her
matrimonial house and went back to Kalaburagi on
21.02.2025. This allegation made by respondent No.2 on
the face of it is fraught with malafides as in reality
respondent No.2 with an intention to harass the
petitioners deliberately left her matrimonial house along
with their two years old child without informing anyone.
The petitioners being worried about their safety,
approached the jurisdictional police, Bengaluru and filed a
missing complaint.
7. It is further submitted that, on 07.03.2024 the
petitioners were not in Bengaluru and had travelled to
their native at Muddebihal to attend their uncle's last rites.
Thus, the question of the petitioners abusing the
8 Crl.P.No.201466 OF 2025
respondent No.2's family members does not arise. The
petitioners had travelled to Kalaburagi on 17.11.2024 to
attend her brother shawl ceremony that on the said date,
the petitioners had visited respondent No.2's house and
that the petitioners had abused her and had refused to
give her jewelery when she requested for it. Though
admittedly, the petitioners had been to Kalaburagi on
17.11.2024 to attend the shawl ceremony of respondent
No.2's brother to which respondent No.2's family had
invited the petitioners. Petitioners did not at any point of
time visit the house of respondent No.2 and in fact spent
of their time at Kyriad Hotel where they stayed, which is
no where close to the place where respondent No.2
resided. Further, respondent No.2 and her sister had
visited the doctor for her dental treatment and was even
at their house and petitioner No.1 had even made
payments to the dental clinic where she had gone for
treatment. Thus, the allegation that the petitioners
harassed her does not stand and is wholly misconceived.
9 Crl.P.No.201466 OF 2025
8. The allegations of cruelty are very vague and
omnibus, which does not disclose any commission of
offences as against the petitioners as such allegations are
all false and fictitious and has been made only with an
intention to harass and disrupt the petitioners' lives. To
substantiate his arguments, the petitioners have produced
Annexure-A to K documents and also relied on the
decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
P.V.Krishnabhat vs. The State of Karnataka reported
in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 484; Geddam Jhansi & Anr.
vs. State of Telangana & Ors. reported in 2025 SCC
OnLine SC 263. On all these grounds, prays to allow the
petition.
9. Per contra, the learned High Court Government
Pleader would submit that after thorough investigation
Investigating Officer has submitted the charge-sheet
against the accused for the alleged commission of
offences. There are sufficient materials to proceed against
the accused for the alleged commission of offences. The
documents produced by the accused can be examined only
10 Crl.P.No.201466 OF 2025
after full-fledged trial. At this stage, on the basis of the
documents produced by the petitioners, proceedings
cannot be quashed. On all these grounds prays to dismiss
the petition.
10. Having heard the arguments on both sides and
perusal of materials, the following points would arise for
my consideration:
1) Whether the petitioners have made out a
case to quash the proceedings initiated
against them in C.C.No.5239/2025 on the
file of I-Addl. JMFC, Kalaburagi?
2) What order?
11. My findings to the above points are as under:
Point No.1 : In the Negative
Point No.2 : As per final order:
Regarding Point No.1:
12. I have examined the materials placed before
this Court. On the basis of the complaint filed by the
Ambuja, who is respondent No.2 in this case, respondent
No.1-Kalaburagi City Women Police have registered the
11 Crl.P.No.201466 OF 2025
case in Crime No.36/2025 against accused Nos.1 to 4, who
are petitioners Nos.1 to 4 for the offences punishable
under Sections 85, 115(2), 351, 352 read with Section
3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'BNS,
2023') and Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961
(for short, 'the D.P.Act'). After investigation, the
Investigating Officer has submitted the charge sheet
against the accused/petitioner Nos.1 to 4 for the offences
punishable under Sections 85, 115(2), 351, 352, 49 read
with Section 3(5) BNS, and Sections 3 and 4 of D.P.Act.
The Investigating Officer has cited 12 witnesses in the
charge-sheet. Out of them, CW1 is the complainant.
CWs.2 and 3 are the attested to the spot panchanama;
CWs.4 to 10 are the witnesses; CWs.11 and 12 are the
police officials who speaks about their respective
investigation. In column No.17 of the charge-sheet the
substance of the accusation is narrated, which is as under:
" ಾನ ಘನ ಾ ಾಲಯದ ಾ ಯ
ಒಳಪಡುವ ಕಲಬುರ ನಗರದ
!ೋ.ಪತ&ದ
ಭಗವ ನಗರದ ಾ ಾದ ಈ !ೋ ಪತ&ದ ಕ&ಸಂ 14 ರ ನಮೂ* ದ
!ೋ.ಪತ&ದ
+ಾ, ನಂ 1 - ಾ.*ಯ ಮದು ೆಯು ಈ !ೋ ಕ&.ಸಂ
ಪತ&ದ ಕ& ಸಂ 12 ರ
ನಮೂ* ದ ಆ0ೋ ನಂ । ಇತ ೊಂ*2ೆ * ಾಂಕ 04.07.2021 ರಂದು
ಬಂ2ಾರ, 75 6ೊ7ೆ 8ೆ9: +ಾ ಾನು
ಆ ದು3, ಮದು ೆ 4ಾಲ4ೆ5 10 6ೊ7ೆ ಬಂ2ಾರ +ಾ ಾನು,
12 Crl.P.No.201466 OF 2025
ರೂ. ನಗದು ಹಣ 4ೊಟು? 5 ಲ; ರೂ
ಮತು 5 ಲ; ರೂ ರೂ. ಖಚು. ಾB
- ಾ.*ಯ ತವರು ಮ ೆಯವರು ಮದು ೆ ಾBರು6ಾ 0ೆ.ೆ ಮದು ೆ ಾದ
ನಂತರ - ಾ.*2ೆ ಗಂಡನ ಮ ೆಯ 4ೇವಲ 1 ಂಗಳವ0ೆ2ೆ
ಸC ಾ ಟು?4ೊಂಡು ನಂತರದ *ನಗಳ ಅವಳ ಾ* ಯ0ಾದ ಎ2 &
ಅಂಬುFಾ92ೆ
ಎ3 ರವರು ಎ| ಇತ 2ೆ ಅಂಬುFಾ9 ರೂ.
2ೆ ತವರು ಮ ೆGಂದ 5 ಲ; ರೂ
ತರಲು HೇಳI ಅಂತ Jೆ&ೕರKೆ ೕBದCಂದ ಎ1 ಇತನು - ಾ.*2ೆ ನ2ೆ
ಒ6ಾ ಯ*ಂದ ವರದ,Kೆ ಾ ನLನುL ಮದು ೆ ಆ ರುತ ೆೆ, ನL Fೊ6ೆ
ಮದು ೆ ಾಗುವMದು ನನ2ೆ ಇಷ?OರುವM*ಲ , ನL ಮದು ೆಯ ಕBP
ಬಂ2ಾರ, ಹಣ 4ೊQ?ರು6ಾ 0ೆೆ, ಈಗ ೕನು ತವರು ಮ ೆGಂದ 5 ಲ; ರೂ
ಬಂ2ಾರ ರೂ.
6ೆ2ೆದು4ೊಂಡು 8ಾ ಅಂತ ಾನ ಕ Rರುಕುಳ ೕಡು6ಾ ಬಂ*ದಲ !ೆ ಎl,
ಎ2 ಮತು ಎ3 ೇದ3ವ0ೆಲ ರೂ ನಮ2ೆ 4ೋQಗಟ?7ೆ +ಾಲ ಆ !ೆ ನL
ತವರು ಮ ೆGಂದ ನL Jಾ 2ೆ ಬರುವ ಆ 6ೆ2ೆದು4ೊಂಡು 8ಾ ಮತು
ಾವM CಯS ಎ+ೆ?ೕT U ೆV ಾಡುವ ಸಲು ಾ 8ಾ ಂR ಂದ 7ೋ ೆ
ಾB 4ೊಡು ಅಂತ - ಾ.*2ೆ ಒ6ಾ ಯ ಾಡು6ಾ ಅವ92ೆ HೊಡಬWೆ
ಾB ೕನು 0ಾ; ,
0ಾ; ಎPX.
ಎPX ಹುYZ,
ಹುYZ PಂಟS,
PಂಟS +ೈ4ೋ,
+ೈ4ೋ ದCದ& ಇ!ೆ3 ಅಂತ
ಾನ ಕ Rರುಕುಳ ೕBರು6ಾ 0ೆೆ.
ಅಲ !ೆ - ಾ.*2ೆ ಒಂದು *ನ !ೇವರ ಮುಂ!ೆ *ೕಪ ಹಚZಲು ತಡ ಾ!ಾಗ
ಎ2 ಇವಳI ಇಷು? ತಡ ಾ *ೕಪ ಹಚುZ ಾ ಅಂತ ಅವಳ Hೊ\ೆ?ಯ
Pೕ7ೆ ಒದು3, PQ?ಲುಗಳ Pೕ7ೆ ಎ]ೆದು4ೊಂಡು ಬಂ*ದಲ !ೆ ಾನು * ಾಲು
4ೆ^_ +ೊ?ೕC ೋಡು6ೆ ೆೆ. ನ2ೆ +ಾG Hೇ2ೆ ಬ`ಾa ಆಗುವMದು
ನಮ2ೆ 2ೊ ರುತ !ೆ ಅಂತ ಭಯ HಾRದು3 ಇರುತ !ೆೆ. ಎ4 ಇತನು ೕನು ನL
ಕರb, ಸcಪL ಮತು ಸುHಾ Hೇ9ದಂ6ೆ 4ೇ94ೊಂಡು ಮ ೆಯ
ಗಂಡ ಕರb
U*3ರ8ೇಕು ಅವರು Hೇ9ದ
Hೇ9ದ Hಾ2ೇ ತವರು ಮ ೆGಂದ * ಹಣ ತರ8ೇಕು
ಮತು ೕನು ಇ ಂದ Hೋಗು 1 ಂಗಳ ನL ಗಂಡ 2ೆ ಇ ೊLಂದು
ಮದು ೆ ಾಡು6ೆ ೆ ಅಂತ Rರುಕುಳ ೕBದು3 ಇರುತ !ೆೆ.
* ಾಂಕ 17.11.2024 ರಂದು +ಾ, ನಂ 5 ೇದ3ವರ ಮಗಳ Rde ಮತು +ಾ,
ನಂ 8 ೇದ3ವರ fಾಲು 4ಾಯ.ಕ&ಮ ಇದ3 4ಾರಣ * ಾಂಕ 13.11.2024
ರಂದು - ಾ.*ಯು ತವರು ಕಲಬುರ ಯ ರುವ ತವರು ಮ ೆ2ೆ ಬಂ*ದು3,
* ಾಂಕ 17.11.2024 ರಂದು 8ೆ92ೆg 10 ಗಂ\ೆ2ೆ ಎl & ಎ2 ರವರು ಸದC
13 Crl.P.No.201466 OF 2025
4ಾಯ.ಕ&ಮಗಳ ಕುCತು - ಾ.*ಯ ತವರು ಮ ೆ2ೆ ಬಂ*ರು6ಾ 0ೆೆ. ಆಗ
- ಾ.*2ೆ ಅವಳ 6ಾGಯು HಾRದ ಒಡ ೆಗಳI ಎ2 ೇದ3ವಳ ಹ ರOದ3
4ಾರಣ - ಾ.*ಯು ಫಂ;ನನ HಾR4ೊಳ:ಲು ನನL ಒಡ ೆಗಳನುL 4ೊB
ಅಂತ ಎ2 ೇದ3ವ92ೆ 4ೇ9!ಾಗ ಎ2 ೇದ3ವಳI ಆ ಒಡ ೆಗಳI ಮX
6ಾGಯವರು ನಮ2ೆ 4ೊQ?ರು6ಾ 0ೆೆ. ಅವM ನ2ೆ 4ೊಡುವM*ಲ ರಂB ಅಂತ
- ಾ.*2ೆ 8ೈ*ದು3, ಎ. ಇತನು ನನL ಅಕ592ೆ ಏನು 4ೇಳI , ಮ ೆ2ೆ
ಬಂದ0ೆ ಅವ ಾನ ಾಡು ಅಂತ 4ೈGಂದ - ಾ.*ಯ ತ7ೆ ಮತು
ಕJಾಳ Pೕ7ೆ HೊWೆಬWೆ ಾBರುವ ಬ2ೆg ತ jೆGಂದ ಆ0ೋ ತರು ಕಲಂ
ಎk.ಎV
85 115(2) 351 352 ಸಂಗಡ 3(5) U.ಎk
ಎk ಎV ಮತು ಕಲಂ 3&4 B
ಎlm ಪ&4ಾರ ಅಪ0ಾಧ ಾBದು3 ದೃಡಪQ?ರುತ !ೆೆ.
4ಾರಣ ಸದC ಆ0ೋ ತರ Oರುದ3 ಆ0ೋ ತರ ಕಲಂ 85 115(2) 351 352
ಎk.ಎV
ಸಂಗಡ 3(5) U.ಎk
ಎk ಎV ಮತು ಕಲಂ 3&4 B ಎlm ೇದ3ರ ಪ&4ಾರ
ಾನ ರವರಲ ."."
13. A careful examination of the entire prosecution
papers placed before this Court, at this stage, this Court is
of the considered view that there are materials to proceed
against the accused for the alleged commission of
offences. I have also examined the documents produced
by the learned counsel for the petitioners at Annexures-A
to K. The arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioners
along with the supported documents at Annexures-A to K
are concerned, at this stage this Court cannot express any
opinion as to these documents, only after full-fledged trial,
14 Crl.P.No.201466 OF 2025
the arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioners and
the documents may be considered by the Trial Court.
14. Viewed from any angle, at this stage, I do not
find any grounds to quash the proceedings. Hence, I
answer point No.1 in the Negative.
Regarding Point No.2:
15. For the aforesaid reasons and discussions, I
proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The petition is dismissed.
(ii) The petitioners are at liberty to file
application for discharge before the Trial
Court for the alleged commission of
offences;
SPONSORED
(iii) If such application is filed, the Trial Court is
directed to dispose of the same in
accordance with law.
The registry is directed to send a copy of this order to
the Trial Court.
Sd/-
(G BASAVARAJA)
JUDGE
sdu;ct:bh