Karnataka HC refuses to quash sexual harassment case against an astrologer accused of inappropriately touching a woman to ‘fix’ her Kundali

The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash proceedings against an astrologer who violated a woman’s modesty by inappropriately touching her under the pretext of performing puja to appease her. KundaliniThe court also refused to drop charges against the woman’s husband, who had taken her to the astrologer and threatened her not to tell anyone about her ordeal.

A single judge panel Judge MG Uma The petition filed by Deepa Darshan HP and Mohandas @Shivaramu, who had approached the court seeking quashing of the charges filed against them under Sections 498A, 354, 354A, 508 R/W 34 of the Indian Penal Code, has been dismissed.

The husband claimed that the complainant had already reported an offence under Section 498-A of the IPC against him and his family members in 2018. Therefore, it is not permissible to file a complaint again in 2019 for an offence similar to the present complaint.

It was further argued that the plaintiff has been living separately since 2018 and hence there is no basis for registration of the present complaint. Moreover, a divorce petition filed by the husband is pending before the Family Court, Bengaluru.

The counsel for the plaintiff contended that the allegations made in the earlier crime were totally different from those made in court. Accused No.2, an astrologer, committed the offence by inappropriately touching her body on the pretext of performing puja to correct her Kundali. The husband was present along with accused No.2 and he did not protest or protect accused No.2. Therefore, specific allegations are made against accused Nos.1 and 2 to constitute the offence.

Results:

The Court observed that the complainant made specific allegations regarding the commission of the offence under Section 498A of IPC from 19.05.2014, i.e. from the date of marriage, to 04.02.2015. She has also stated that accused No.1 took her to accused No.2 who posed as an astrologer and touched her body inappropriately and committed the offence. When she resisted, the husband warned her not to resist accused No.2 and hence joined hands with accused No.2 to commit the offences.

The court then stated that the allegations against the husband of accused No. 1 and accused No. 2, who claimed to be an astrologer, are of a serious nature. Specific allegations are made against both the accused and in these circumstances, it cannot be said that the criminal proceedings can be quashed.

It added: “In the present case, by filing the second complaint, the allegation of cruelty is made against accused No. 1 by invoking Section 498A of the IPC. Accused No. 2 is a stranger to the family and has posed as an astrologer. The informant has made out a specific overt act which constitutes an offence punishable under Sections 354 and 354A of the IPC.”

So it lasted “Given the nature and seriousness of the allegations made against Defendants 1 and 2 in this case, I am of the opinion that this is not an appropriate case to discontinue criminal proceedings.”

Appearance: Advocate HB Rudresh for the petitioners.

Additional SPP Asma Kouser for R1.

Advocate Ashish Ram. D for Advocate Krishnamoorthy. D for R2.

Citation Number: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 390

Case Title: Deepa Darshan HP & ANR AND Police Inspector & ANR Case Number: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2585 OF 2021

Click here to read/download the order