Bengaluru, Jun 10: The High Court of Karnataka passed an interim order of stay on the complaint filed by a woman, alleging among other things, rape, by her husband with whom she lived for only one day.
“If this cannot be a case where the complainant has abused the process of law, prima facie, there cannot be a better illustration,” the high court said while granting the stay on the criminal process against the husband and his family members.
The husband and his family members had approached the high court challenging the complaint filed by the wife and the registration of the case under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The two were colleagues at an MNC motorbike showroom in Bengaluru.
They courted each other for four years before marrying on January 27, 2023 in a temple and they got the marriage registered before the Registrar of Marriages in Malleshwaram. The same day, the wife’s birthday was celebrated.
The husband allegedly came to know of the wife’s earlier affair and her being in touch with the other person on WhatsApp.
ALSO READ: K'taka HC confirms capital punishment on man who killed five, including three of his minor children
An argument broke out the following day, which led to the wife walking out of the matrimonial house on January 29.
“It is averred that she threatened to end the marriage with the first petitioner. From 29.01.2023 to 01.03.2023 close to 32 days there was no interaction between the two, and after 32 days, complainant files a complaint before the jurisdictional police alleging the afore-quoted offences,” the high court noted.
The wife’s police complaint said that she “did not know what happened to her on the date of marriage. She claims she was intoxicated. She further claims that she does not remember having signed anything before the Registrar of Marriages. She further alleges that the petitioners on coming to know of her earlier affair had tortured her. As per the allegations in the complaint, though she was married, because of the aforesaid circumstances, the alleged sexual act between the two after marriage amounts to rape.”
The high court which heard the husband’s and his family members’ petition said, “The complainant having fallen in love, being in a relationship for few years marries the first petitioner, lives for few days and then alleges rape. It does not stop at the first petitioner, but all the members of the family of the first petitioner who were present at the marriage are dragged into the web of crime.”
Granting the interim stay, the high court said, “Therefore, there shall be an interim order of stay of investigation and further proceedings in Crime No.23 of 2023 qua the petitioners, till the disposal of the petition. Accordingly, application stands allowed.”
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Bengaluru, Mar 6 (PTI): The Karnataka Assembly on Thursday passed the Bangalore Palace (Utilisation and Regulation of Land) Bill, reaffirming state ownership over 472 acres and 16 guntas of land here, amid protests by the opposition BJP.
During the discussion, Karnataka Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister H K Patil said the state government would have to provide Rs 200 crore worth of Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) for each acre of land, which means that for 15 acres, Rs 3,000 crore worth of TDR would be issued.
“If we accept it, then this 2-km stretch of road will become the costliest road in the world. If we accept it then how are we going to develop the city in later stages? How will you carry out development works?” asked Patil.
He also pointed out that this question was raised not only under the Congress government but also during the previous BJP regime.
However, the BJP-led cabinet has opposed the project.
ALSO READ: Budget session: Law Min. HK Patil introduces Microfinance bill in Karnataka assembly
“Suppose we agree to it then, what will be the valuation of the 472 acres? It will be lakhs and lakhs of crores of rupees. Can we accept?” Patil wondered.
The Minister said the government had previously exercised its executive powers to issue an ordinance, which was approved by the Governor. Now the government is bringing a bill with two amendments.
“In this bill, we have made provisions either to develop or drop the road development work,” Patil explained.
However, BJP state president B Y Vijayendra and BJP MLA Arvind Bellad opposed the move, alleging that the government was targetting Yaduveer Krishna Datta Chamaraja Wadiyar, the scion of the Mysuru royal family, and the BJP MP from Mysuru-Kodagu constituency out of political vendetta.
“We talk of 472 acres of Mysuru Maharaja but here there are many Maharajas who too own 400 acres, 500 acres and thousands of acres of land, which is known to everyone,” Bellad said.
He slammed the Congress government, saying political power should not be misused for personal vendetta.
“Why (the then Deputy Chief Minister) Siddaramaiah brought the law in 1996 pertaining to the Bangalore Palace? Why are you setting eyes on the Bangalore Palace?” he asked.
Vijayendra charged that Wadiyar won the election on BJP ticket so the state government realised that it should acquire it.
“This bill has been brought for political vengeance. We are not discussing whether Rs 3,000 crore is exorbitant or not but the moment Yaduveer became MP, the state government woke up. You should be ashamed. This house should not be used for political vendetta,” he said.
Intervening, Minister Priyank Kharge said Vijayendra should not have raised it because the intention behind building the road was noble.
According to him, the BJP too had the same plan when it was in power.
He sought to know whether thousands of crores of rupees be spent on a road which should have cost significantly less.
In response, BJP MLA B A Basavaraj (Byrathi) said issuing TDR will not be a burden on the state government and appealed to the ruling Congress to reconsider its stance.
Minister Ramalinga Reddy too explained that the Karnataka government acquired the entire land way back in 1996.
The Mysuru royal family went to the High Court, which gave ruling in favour of the state government. The royal family then approached the Supreme Court, where the case is still going on, the Minister pointed out.
“The final judgment is pending in the SC to decide whether the acquisition was right or wrong. If the SC says it’s the royal family’s property then let it be so. If the order is in the state government’s favour then we can take a decision. The bill is only about it,” Reddy explained.
Speaker U T Khader then called for a voice vote and the bill was passed by the Assembly amidst opposition BJP’s discontent.