The Karnataka High Court in the case XXX versus The State of Karnataka observed and quashed an FIR registered against a woman under section 498-A, Section 504, Section 506 and Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3 and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 by other women that the accused was having an illicit relationship with her husband. While allowing the petition, A bench of Single judge Justice Hemant Chandangoudar observed in the petition filled by the women that the only allegations against the petitioner-accused No.5 is that the women is having an illicit relationship with the accused No.1 who is the husband of the respondent No.2 – informant. It was noticed that these allegations raised does not constitute the commission of the offences alleged against the petitioner –accused No.5. The 2nd Respondent lodged the first information report, the FIR stated that the women is the legally wedded wife of accused No.1 and the women was subjected to cruelty by accused No.1 to 4 and the accused No.5 – petitioner is having illicit relationship with her husband. It was submitted by the petitioner that the only allegation raised against the petitioner – accused No. 5 is that she is having an illicit relationship with accused No.1, as he is the legally wedded husband of her. The bench observed that the allegations made against the petitioner – accused No.5 does not constitute the commission of the offences alleged against the petitioner. Hence, the registration of the FIR for the aforesaid offences is impermissible. The plea was opposed by the prosecution stating that the allegations made in the First Information Report discloses that the commission of the offences alleged against the petitioner – accused No.5. The findings of the Court: The bench noted, while going through the complaint that in the present case, this allegation does not constitute the commission of the offences alleged against the petitioner – accused No.5 and in the absence of any essential ingredients so as to constitute the commission of the said offences and the registration of the FIR against accused No.5 is without any substance. The bench allowed the petition
