ORDER : Accused No.2 in S.C.No.4/2018 in the Court of V Additional District and Sessions Judge, at Mysuru (henceforth for brevity it is referred to as ‘Sessions Court’) has preferred this petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of the entire proceedings in S.C.No.4/2018 which has arisen out of Crime No.37/2016 of complainant’s Police Station. 2. It is the contention of the petitioner in her Memorandum of Petition that there are no grounds to array her as one of the accused in the sessions case. Prosecution materials have nowhere alleged her involvement in the crime. As such, entire criminal proceedings against her be quashed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the contention taken up by the petitioner in her present petition. Learned counsel also submitted that just few days prior to her death, deceased herself had lodged a complaint against her uncle, her brother and her cousin alleging that they have humiliated and insulted her husband. That being the case, alleged complaint that her husband and mother-in-law subjected her to cruelty are unfounded one. 4. Learned Special Public Prosecutor who has taken notice for the 1st respondent-State submitted that the present petition is totally bereft of any merit. When the matter has not yet been taken up for hearing before charge before the Sessions Court, the petitioner cannot come and plead before this Court by invoking Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure. He also submitted that there are sufficient materials to prove the alleged crime against both the accused. As such, the petition does not deserves to be considered favourably. 5. The summary of the case of the prosecution is that on 26.02.2016 at 7.00 p.m., C.W.1 – Udaya Shankar, younger brother of deceased Bhramarambika lodged a complaint alleging that the deceased Bhramarambika was married ten months prior to one Niranjan, during which period, the said bridegroom was given with 110 grams of gold and Rs.50,000/in cash as dowry. After marriage of Bhramarambika, her husband Niranjan started subjecting her to cruelty by demanding a share in the property from her parental house. Many advises given to him did not yield any results. He was physically assaulting her and mentally harassing her in that regard. The accused humiliated her in the presence of village people on the day of obsequies ceremony of father of deceased Bhramarambika. Many advises given to him did not yield any results. He was physically assaulting her and mentally harassing her in that regard. The accused humiliated her in the presence of village people on the day of obsequies ceremony of father of deceased Bhramarambika. Since the deceased Bramarambika could not tolerate the cruelty, on 26.02.2016 in the morning she died in an unnatural manner. The complainant was told that the deceased Bhramarambika committed suicide by hanging herself. When the complainant visited her sister’s house, both the accused were not there in the house. After breaking open the bed room window glass, when these people peeped inside, they noticed hanging dead body of Bhramarambika. The police registered the complaint for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B), 498(A) read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. After completing investigation, police have filed charge sheet against accused No.1Niranjan, husband of the deceased Bhramarambika and accused No.2Vasantha, mother-in-law of deceased Bhramarambika for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B), 498(A) read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. 6. A reading of the complaint though does not specifically mention any specific overt act against accused No.2, who is petitioner herein, however, its recital clearly goes to show that the accusation made were not just confined to the husband of the deceased but also included the present petitioner/accused No.2. The complaint itself gives the name of accused No.2 as the one who was also harassing the deceased. The complainant has specifically stated that it is not just the husband of the deceased but also his mother, who is the present petitioner, as the ones subjecting the deceased to cruelty. If the petitioner believes that she is innocent of the alleged offences, still she has the opportunities to agitate the same in the Sessions Court at the appropriate stage. Merely because, the case is committed to Sessions Court, it cannot be said that such committal of the case was without any basis and that there was no material against accused No.2/petitioner, to proceed further in the matter. Accordingly, I do not find any grounds to admit this petition for hearing. As such, the petition stands dismissed at the stage of admission itself.