Sandeep and Others vs State of Karnataka and Others

K.N. Phaneendra, J.—The petitioner has approached this Court seeking to quash the FIR at Annexures-E and F in Crime No. 162/2014 on the file of Gandhi Gunj Police Station, Bidar.

The records disclose that respondent No. 2-Surekha claiming herself to be the wife of first petitioner lodged a complaint before Gandhi Gunj Police Station on 07.07.2014 making allegations that she was given in marriage to the first petitioner on 06.05.2007 and at the time of marriage, lot of demand with regard to cash amount, gold and silver articles etc., was made by petitioner No. 1 herein and his family members. Even after the marriage, petitioners have been ill-treating and harassing the complainant and treated her with all cruelty. In this background, it is alleged that on 22.06.2014 in the afternoon, when the complainant was in her maternal home at Vidhyanagar Colony, Bidar, all the petitioners came there and threatened her with dire consequences at the tip of knife, abused her in filthy language and demanded a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/-. On these allegations, the police have registered a case and started investigation. At this stage, the present petition is filed for quashing of the entire first information report on the ground that the second respondent is married to some other person and converted herself to Mohammedan community. Therefore, the compliant does not survive.

In order to ascertain the said fact and to consider the validity of the certificate issued by the Chief Executive Officer, Andhra Pradesh Wakf Board dated 30.10.2014 produced before the Court by the petitioners with regard to alleged marriage, the second respondent was called before the Court. The respondent appeared before the Court and denied the said allegations made against her and also she did not admit the said document produced before the Court by the petitioners. Therefore, relying upon the said documents which are disputed before the Court, this Court cannot quash the legally initiated criminal proceedings and when the first information report discloses commission of some offences, the police have got legitimate power to investigate the said matter. Under the above said circumstances, I am of the opinion that it is too premature stage to find out truth or falsity of the allegations made against the second respondent by the petitioners herein. All the allegations and counter allegations have to be tested during the course of investigation and the police have to file appropriate report before the competent Court. Therefore, it is just and necessary to dismiss this petition at this stage, with a liberty to the petitioners to approach the Court in future as and when necessitated.

With these observations, the petition stands dismissed.