IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5255/2014 BETWEEN:
1. MR. CHANDRA NAYAK S/O. BHIMANAYAK AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS.
2. MR. BHIMANAYAK S/O. SOMA NAIK AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS 3. SMT. DHANA BAI W/O. BHIMANAYAK AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS 4. MR. SAKSHANAYAK S/O. BHIMANAYAK AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, (PETITIONER NOS. 1 TO 4 ARE THE R/O. DEVARADODDI, KAILANCHAHOBLI RAMANAGAR DISTRICT-562 159.
5. MR. KRISHNAMURTHY S/O. TAVERANAYAK AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/O. SOLLEPURA H.D. KOTE-571 114 MYSORE DISTRICT. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI. BRIJESH PATIL, ADV. FOR SRI. P.N. HEGDE, ADV.) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT P.S. REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE-01.
2. SMT. JYOTI FORMER WIFE OF CHANDRA NAYAK AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS FORMERLY THE RESIDENT OF PRAGATHIPURA BANASHANKARI-560 008 BANGALORE.
PRESENTLY RESIDENT OF HALLIGUDDA THANDYA CHIKKAMUDUVADI POST KANAKAPURA TALUK-562 117. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIJAYAKUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. SPP. FOR R1 SRI. N. SRIRAM REDDY, ADV. FOR R2 - ABSENT) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.16849/2012 PENDING ON THE FILE OF VTH ACMM, AT BANGALORE IN CONNECTION WITH THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 498A OF IPC, AND SECTIONS 3 AND 4 OF THE DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional SPP appearing for respondent No.1. The counsel for respondent No.2 is absent.
2. Charge sheet is laid against the petitioners for offences punishable under Sections 498A of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to the settlement arrived at between petitioner No.1 and complainant/respondent No.2 wherein respondent No.2 has agreed to withdraw the complaint filed by her in C.C.No.16849/2012. The petitioner has produced the decree passed by the Family Court in M.C.No.2140/2012 based on the said memorandum of settlement.
4. In terms of the said settlement, the respondent No.2 having withdrawn the allegations made in C.C.No.16849/2012, the petition is allowed. The proceedings initiated against the petitioners in C.C.No.16849/2012 pending on the file of the V Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, are quashed.
Sd/- JUDGE *alb/-.