<p>Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court has said that a paramour cannot be drawn into proceedings for offences punishable under IPC section 498A (dowry harassment), which is essentially meant for disputes between family members.</p>.<p>Justice M Nagaprasanna said this while quashing a criminal case registered against a woman from Mysuru.</p>.<p>The petitioner woman challenged the case registered for offences punishable under IPC sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 and sections 3, 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.</p>.Biklu Shiva murder case: Karnataka High Court rejects anticipatory bail to BJP MLA.<p>The complainant had filed a case against her husband, several family members, and the petitioner woman. The police filed the charge sheet, naming the petitioner woman as accused number five in the case.</p>.<p>The complainant (wife) stated that her husband had an illicit relationship with the petitioner woman and it continued after the marriage. The complaint further alleged that the husband and in-laws demanded dowry. It was also stated that the husband abused the complainant, saying he would have lived happily had he married the petitioner woman.</p>.<p>The complainant contended that although IPC Section 498A or offences under the Dowry Prohibition Act cannot be filed against a paramour, other offences under IPC sections 323, 504 and 506 (assault, criminal intimidation) could apply to the petitioner woman. It was further argued that IPC Section 498A could be attracted against a paramour who is instrumental in disturbing the family.</p>.<p>After perusing the complaint and the charge sheet, Justice Nagaprasanna said it is a settled principle of law that a total stranger, neighbour or paramour cannot be drawn into proceedings for offences punishable under IPC Section 498A.</p>.<p>Citing the Apex Court judgment in the Dechamma IM case, the court observed that a woman with whom a man has romantic relations outside marriage would not be a “relative of the husband” under IPC Section 498A.</p>.<p>The court also noted that none of the ingredients of IPC sections 503, 504 and 506 are found in the complaint or the charge sheet.</p>.<p>"What remains is the offence under Section 323 of the IPC, for which there is no wound certificate indicating the petitioner assaulted the complainant. In the absence of all these sections, a paramour cannot be drawn into proceedings for offences punishable under Section 498A of the IPC, which is essentially meant for disputes between family members. In that light, the petition deserves to succeed,” the court said.</p>
<p>Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court has said that a paramour cannot be drawn into proceedings for offences punishable under IPC section 498A (dowry harassment), which is essentially meant for disputes between family members.</p>.<p>Justice M Nagaprasanna said this while quashing a criminal case registered against a woman from Mysuru.</p>.<p>The petitioner woman challenged the case registered for offences punishable under IPC sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 and sections 3, 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.</p>.Biklu Shiva murder case: Karnataka High Court rejects anticipatory bail to BJP MLA.<p>The complainant had filed a case against her husband, several family members, and the petitioner woman. The police filed the charge sheet, naming the petitioner woman as accused number five in the case.</p>.<p>The complainant (wife) stated that her husband had an illicit relationship with the petitioner woman and it continued after the marriage. The complaint further alleged that the husband and in-laws demanded dowry. It was also stated that the husband abused the complainant, saying he would have lived happily had he married the petitioner woman.</p>.<p>The complainant contended that although IPC Section 498A or offences under the Dowry Prohibition Act cannot be filed against a paramour, other offences under IPC sections 323, 504 and 506 (assault, criminal intimidation) could apply to the petitioner woman. It was further argued that IPC Section 498A could be attracted against a paramour who is instrumental in disturbing the family.</p>.<p>After perusing the complaint and the charge sheet, Justice Nagaprasanna said it is a settled principle of law that a total stranger, neighbour or paramour cannot be drawn into proceedings for offences punishable under IPC Section 498A.</p>.<p>Citing the Apex Court judgment in the Dechamma IM case, the court observed that a woman with whom a man has romantic relations outside marriage would not be a “relative of the husband” under IPC Section 498A.</p>.<p>The court also noted that none of the ingredients of IPC sections 503, 504 and 506 are found in the complaint or the charge sheet.</p>.<p>"What remains is the offence under Section 323 of the IPC, for which there is no wound certificate indicating the petitioner assaulted the complainant. In the absence of all these sections, a paramour cannot be drawn into proceedings for offences punishable under Section 498A of the IPC, which is essentially meant for disputes between family members. In that light, the petition deserves to succeed,” the court said.</p>