Judgment : 1. The petitioner is arrayed as accused in Crime No. 14 of 2010 of Harohalli Police Station registered for offences punishable, under Sections 323,324,504,306 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 2. The contents of the first information would reveal that the first informant was working as Group ‘D’ employee in Morarji Desai Model Residential School, Doddabadagere of which the petitioner was the Principal. The first informant has alleged that the petitioner was demanding her to render domestic services. On refusal of first informant, the petitioner and the warden of hostel are alleged to have abused and insulted the petitioner by taking out the name of her caste. They had also assaulted her. On 21-1-2010, petitioner is alleged to have assaulted first informant and also threatened her with dire consequences to her life. Being disgusted with conduct of the petitioner and acts of the petitioner, first informant consumed sleeping pills to commit suicide. She was saved by timely treatment. In the circumstances, respondent/Police have registered aforesaid crime for offences punishable under Sections 323,324,504,306 and 511 of the IPC. Therefore the petitioner is before this Court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 to quash first information. 3. The learned Counsel for petitioner would submit that prima facie an offence under Section 306 of the IPC is not attracted. Even before the first information was lodged, the petitioner had given information to police regarding attempted suicide by the first informant. Therefore, averments of first information are vexatious, frivolous and investigation of case would be abuse of process of law. 4. The learned State Public Prosecutor would submit that apart from registration of the case, there is no further progress. If the averments of first information do not constitute and offence under Section 306 of the IPC, the Investigating Officer would definitely take note of the same. The averments of first information would disclose that the petitioner has assaulted and insulted the first informant. Therefore, there are no grounds to quash the first information. 5. The law is fairly well-settled that in a petition under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. this Court can exercise power to quash the first information only if the averments of first information accepted on their face value do not constitute any offence at all or the averments are highly absurd and improbable. 6. 5. The law is fairly well-settled that in a petition under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. this Court can exercise power to quash the first information only if the averments of first information accepted on their face value do not constitute any offence at all or the averments are highly absurd and improbable. 6. In the case on hand, the averments of first information would constitute the offences alleged therein. Therefore, I do not find any ground to quash the first information. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.