KACD010030712021

Presented on : 11-10-2021
Registered on : 11-10-2021
Decided on : 10-10-2023
Duration : 1 years, 11
months, 30 days

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS

JUDGE, AT: CHITRADURGA

Present: Smt. B.S. Rekha, B.A.(Law), LL.M.,

Prl. District & Sessions Judge,
Chitradurga

Dated this the 10th day of October, 2023

Crl. Revision Petition No.91/2021

Revision 1. Thippamma W/o Venkateshappa, aged

Petitioners:
about 55 years, Prof: President (Councilor),
City Municipality, Chitradurga.
2. Venkateshappa S/o Bommajja, aged
about 58 years, Prof: Councilor,
Both are permanent R/o #192, Near M.K.
Palace, Railway Station Area, Chitradurga.
(By Sri B.K. Rahamathulla, advocate)

/versus/
Respondent: 1. State by: Chitradurga Women Police,
2. Shwetha S/o Shanmuka, aged about
32 years, R/o # 192, Near M.K. Palace,
Railway Station Area, Chitradurga.
(R1 by the Public Prosecutor, Chitradurga,
 2 Cr.R.P. 91/2021

R2 By Smt. Chandramma. K.P, advocate)

ORDER

This revision petition is filed U/Sec. 397 of

Cr.P.C. requesting the court to set aside the order
dated: 03.03.2021 with respect to application filed
under section 319 of Cr.P.C. and to remand the case to
provide opportunity to the petitioners to file objections.

2. It is stated in the petition that, Chitradurga Rural

Police have registered a case against the petitioners
and another and after investigation, it was found that,
there are no sufficient materials to proceed against the
petitioners and hence, the petitioners were not
included in the charge sheet but, later during evidence,
the petitioners have included without giving proper
opportunity by the 1st Addl. Senior Civil Judge &
JMFC., Chitradurga and the application was allowed
without giving opportunity to the petitioners and it was
allowed illegally, arbitrarily and capriciously and
hence, this petition is filed.

3. It is stated in the ground of appeal that,

violation of the elementary principles of justice
 3 Cr.R.P. 91/2021

amounts to miscarriage of justice from misconception

of law and irregularity of procedure by the 1 st Addl.
Senior Civil Judge & JMFC., Chitradurga in CC
No.2098/2018. On perusal of the entire materials on
record, it is stated that, there is no material for trial
against the petitioners for the offence punishable
under sections 498­A, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and Secs.
3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and there is no prima­
facie case against the petitioners to proceed further
with the case. The accused No.1 Shanmukha and his
wife respondent No.2 are leading life happily together
and at this stage, if the order is not set aside, it will
disturb their marital life. The oral and documentary
evidence of respondent is not corroborated and same is
inconsistent with several variations, omissions and
contradictions which clearly goes to show that, the
case of respondent is completely false and heavy
burden cast on the respondent to prove his case
beyond all reasonable doubt. The Trial Court has
grossly erred in appreciating the fact of the case and
grossly erred in appreciating the legal aspect and
appreciating the authorities of Hon'ble Supreme Court
of India and High Court on taking of cognizance. The
Trial Court has grossly erred in considering the
 4 Cr.R.P. 91/2021

jurisdiction of the court. On the close scrutiny of the

documents submitted with the charge sheet, it can be
safely held that, there is no sufficient ground for
proceeding with the trial in this case and the Trial
Court has grossly erred in appreciating the facts that,
the respondent's version is itself in ambiguity and not
believable.
4. TCR is called in this case.
5. Heard arguments on both sides.

6. Now, the only point that arises for my

consideration is :
“Whether the revision petitioners have made
out sufficient grounds to allow the present
revision petition?”

7. My finding to the above point is in

“affirmative”, for the following stated;

REASONS

8. Perused the charge sheet of the Trial Court

wherein, after framing of charge, the complainant was
fully examined and thereafter, application under
section 319 of Cr.P.C. was filed. The notice on the
application was sent to accused No.2 and 3 and
 5 Cr.R.P. 91/2021

thereafter, B/W issued against the proposed accused

No.2 and 3 and later, NBW was issued against the
proposed accused No.2 and 3. Thereafter, the accused
No.1 to 3 were present and on 17.02.2021, the order
sheet shows that, the accused No.1 present and
accused No.2 and 3 absent, EP filed and allowed. In­
spite of issuance of non­bailable warrants to proposed
accused persons, it could not be possible to secure
them. Therefore, notice to proposed accused persons
on application under section 319 of Cr.P.C. is
dispensed and it was posted for orders on application.
Thereafter, the order was passed on 03.03.2021 by
allowing the application.

9. It is observed in the order sheet that, the

I.O. recorded the statement of victim. In her statement
she stated that, her husband Shanmukhappa alone
was the wrong doer, there is no role of her in­laws. On
the basis of her further statement IO dropped the
names of Venkateshappa and Thippamma in the
charge sheet and filed charge sheet against the
accused No.1 alone.
 6 Cr.R.P. 91/2021

10. However, after framing the charge, CW­1

was examined wherein she has re­iterated her previous
version involving her in­laws. Her evidence before the
court corroborated with her previous statement i.e.,
complaint. Further statement is not signed statement
and the learned APP has not used the said statement
for the purpose of contradicting of PW­1. Thus, the
prosecution has made out sufficient grounds to
implead the proposed accused No.3 and 4 and the
application was allowed.

11. Now, the court has to consider whether the

order passed by the Trial Court is proper or not. In
this case, on perusal of the deposition of PW­1 it could
be ascertain hat, there was a quarrel and husband and
his parents were harassing her. Her husband was
coming under the influence of alcohol. Even though,
she informed about ill­treatment to her parents, but it
was of no use. Her husband attempted to kill her and
for which, she shouted and her in­laws came there and
they have also supported him to take away her life.

12. In this case, after this deposition of PW­1,

application came to be filed and it was allowed by the
 7 Cr.R.P. 91/2021

Trial Court. However, the procedure followed by the

Trial Court regarding issuance of notice and
application is correct, but without providing an
opportunity to the accused to contest the application
had passed orders is not proper. Opportunity ought to
have been given by the Trial Court for these accused to
put forth their defence and thereafter, Trial Court
ought to have passed orders.

13. However, the petition before this court

shows that, the application of the petitioner is that, no
opportunity is given to contest the application and
without providing opportunity, the application was
allowed.

14. On perusal of order sheet, it could be

ascertain that, the contention taken by the petitioner is
acceptable one. Hence, it is just and necessary to set
aside the order passed by the Trial Court with a
direction to the Trial Court to grant opportunity to the
proposed accused No.2 and 3 to file objections and to
proceed with the case. Hence, in my opinion that
order passed by the Trial Court has to be set aside.
Hence, I answer point No.1 in the affirmative.
 8 Cr.R.P. 91/2021

15. For the foregoing reasons and my finding to

above point, I proceed to pass following:
ORDER

The Criminal Revision Petition filed by

revision petitioners under Section 397 of Cr.P.C. is
hereby allowed.
The order passed by the 1 st Addl. Senior
Civil Judge & JMFC, Chitradurga, dated: 03.03.2021
in CC No.2098/2018 on application filed under section
319 of Cr.P.C. is hereby set aside.
The Trial Court is directed to provide
opportunity to the proposed accused No.2 and 3 to file
objections and to proceed with the case in accordance
with law.
Send copy of this order along with TCR to
the Trial Court.

(Dictated to the Judgment Writer, transcription and

computerized by him, script corrected, signed and then pronounced by
me in the Open Court on this the 10th day of October, 2023).

(B.S. Rekha)
Prl. District & Sessions Judge,
Chitradurga