IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8365/2018 BETWEEN:
1. MR. KAREEM YUSUF PATEL S/O YUSUF PATEL AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS.
2. MR. YUSUF KAMAL PATEL S/O KAMAL PATEL AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS.
3. MRS. SABIRA YUSUF PATEL W/O YUSUF PATEL AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.
4. MR. JAFFER YUSUF PATEL S/O YUSUF PATEL AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS.
5. MRS. ASIYA ABDUL HAFEES W/O ABDUL HAFEES AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS. RESIDING AT NO.5/70 INDIRANAGAR, HOSRU KRISHNAGIRI TAMILNADU – 635 109 ALSO AT THE ADRESS OF (P) 1 TO 7.
6. MS. SOFIYA YUSUF PATEL D/O YUSUF PATEL AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS.
7. MS. SABA PATEL W/O RAHIM PATEL AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS.
ALL THE PETITIONERS 1 TO 4, 6 AND 7 ARE RESIDING AT PATEL MANSION NO.88 3RD CROSS/MAIN KOUSAR NAGAR, R.T. NAGAR POST OPPOSITE TO POORINAMA HOSPITAL BANGALORE – 560 032.
(BY SRI. SUNIL KUMAR H., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY R.T. NAGAR POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA.
2. MRS. RUMANA FARHEEN AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS W/O KAREEM YUSUF PATEL RESIDING AT NO.32 1ST FLOOR 3RD CROSS, NEAR JAMIA MASJID ILYAS NAGAR, BANGALORE SOUTH J.P. NAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 078.
... PETITIONERS (BY SRI. S. RACHAIAH., HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. B.A. TURKI., ADVOCATE AND SRI. M.O SULTAN., ADVOCATE FOR R-2) ... RESPONDENTS THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR AND COMPLAINT IN THE CRIME NO.202/2018 VIDE ANNEXURE A, FILED BY THE RESPONDENT R.T. NAGAR POLICE STATION, PENDING BEFORE THE 56TH ACMM, COURT AT BANGALORE CITY.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Petitioners who are arraigned as accused in Crime No.202/2018 registered by R.T.Nagar Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 498A of IPC r/w Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act 1961, which is pending on the file of 56th Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, are before this Court seeking for quashing of said proceedings.
2. Today parties have filed a joint memo of compromise stating thereunder that parties have amicably settled their dispute and it is agreed between parties to the following terms:
“2. After the marriage the First Petitioner and Second Respondent lived for about Two years very happily, however due to certain difference between the parties First petitioner and Second respondent lived separately since eight months.
3. Second Respondent filed complaint before the First Respondent police under section 498A of IPC and section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, in Crime No.202/2018 in the filed of 56th Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, in Bangalore against all the petitioners herein.
4. Petitioners obtained anticipatory bail apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police, petitioner no.1 has also filed suit for Restitution of Conjugal rights in O.S.No.326/2018 before the Family Court at Bangalore. Petitioners being aggrieved with the registration of complaint before the 1st respondent police filed the above noted petition under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure and obtained stay of all further proceedings in Crime No.202/2012 before the learned Magistrate.
5. Now, at this dispense of time, elders and family members of petitioners and respondent no.2 came forward for amicable settlement of their marital dispute, accordingly, the respondent no.2 had agreed to withdraw all allegations made against the petitioners in the complaint and the First Petitioner and Second Respondent have agreed to mutually put an end to the marital relationship between them.
6. That the Second Respondent has taken all her belongings from the house of the First Petitioner and the Second Respondent have amicably no claim whatsoever against the Petitioners nor the petitioners shall have any claim against the 2nd Respondent.
7. First Petitioner has paid a sum of Rupees One Lakh only (Rs.1,00,000/-) in favour of Second Respondent vide demand draft dated 13-03-2019 drawn at Axis Bank, R.T.Nagar Branch, Bangalore, vide DD No.034449 as permanent alimony to the 2nd respondent.
8. It is mutually agreed by the First Petitioner and Second Respondent that they shall enter into a mutual divorce agreement between them as per the Islamic law (Qula).
9. It is also undertaken that after the execution of mutual Divorce between the parties they shall not interfere in the rights of the other parties and they are entitled to marry anybody else as they desire.
10. In view of above understanding the parties have come forward to resolve their marital dispute and the 2nd respondent has no objection to quash the pending proceedings against the petitioners before the First Respondent police under section 498A of IPC and section 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, in Crime No.202/2018 in the file of 56th Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, in Bangalore.
11. First Petitioner shall also withdraw the suit filed for restitution of conjugal rights in O.S.No.326/2018 before the Family Court at Bangalore.”
3. Parties are present before Court and they reiterate the contents of joint memo of compromise. Second respondent – complainant present before Court submits that out of her own free will and volition, without any threat, force or coercion she has affixed her signature to the Joint Memo of Compromise and she is not inclined to continue with the complaint lodged by her against petitioners. To establish their identities photocopies of identity cards issued by the statutory authority is produced along with joint memo of compromise. In token of having identified the parties present before Court, respective learned Advocates have also affixed their signatures to the joint memo of compromise.
4. In the light of aforestated facts and keeping in mind the principles laid down by the Apex Court in the case of GIAN SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, this Court is of the considered view that continuation of further proceedings against petitioners would not sub-serve the ends of justice and it would be an abuse of process of law. Hence, this Court finds there is no impediment to grant the prayer sought for.
Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER (i) Criminal petition is allowed.
(ii) Proceedings pending against petitioners in Crime No.202/2018 registered by R.T.Nagar Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 498A of IPC r/w Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act 1961, on the file of 56th Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, is hereby quashed and petitioners are acquitted of aforesaid offences.
SD/- JUDGE DR