IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.3730 OF 2013 BETWEEN:
SMT. S.M. RATNAMMA W/O LATE S.S. RAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS RESIDING AT MURALI NILAYA 8TH CROSS, JAYANAGAR ‘B’ BLOCK TAKLE ROAD, KOLAR-563 101 … PETITIONER (BY SHRI. H.V. SUBRAMANYA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE BY KOLAR TOWN POLICE KOLAR-563 101 2. STATE BY CID POLICE BANGALORE-560 001 3. SMT. SADANA K.S S/O SRINATH R/A DODDAMANE, KURBAGODU SANGAMESHWARA PET KANDYA GOBLI, CHIKKAMAGALUR TALUK AND DIST, PIN-577 101 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI. NASRULLA KHAN, HCGP FOR R.1 & R.2; SHRI. C.G. SUNDAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.318/11 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN) AND CJM, KOLAR AS CONCERNED TO THE PETITIONER FOR THE REASONS STATED THEREIN.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Respondent No.2 initiated criminal proceedings in C.C.No.318/2011 on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) & CJM, Kolar, for offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323 & 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3, 4 & 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (“D.P.Act” for short) against her husband and mother-in-law. Petitioner herein is the mother-in-law of the complainant.
2. Heard Shri H.V. Subramanya, learned advocate for the petitioner, Shri Nasuralla Khan, learned HCGP for the State and Shri C.G. Sundar, learned advocate for respondent No.3.
3. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that parties have settled the matrimonial dispute amicably and this Court has quashed the criminal proceedings against the complainant’s husband in CRL.P.No.1962/2014 and connected cases on 21.04.2014 and accordingly, prays that the criminal proceedings against the petitioner may also be quashed.
4. This Court has allowed the aforementioned Criminal petition by recording thus;
“4. When these matters are taken up for consideration, petitioners are present before the Court. So also the second respondent. The second respondent admits before the Court that she has received the entire amount as well as vacant residential site. Accordingly, considering the fact that dispute between the parties being amicably settled, which is in the nature of matrimonial dispute and the entire settlement amount agreed between the parties having been paid to the wife, no relationship of husband and wife exists between the first petitioner and second respondent, in view of the settlement arrived at between them, following the judgment of Apex Court in the mater of Gian Singh – vs- State of Punjab and Another, reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, the criminal cases which are registered and pending consideration in CC.No.318/2011 on the file of CJM, Kolar, CC.No.56372011 pending consideration on the file of ACJM, Bangalore and Crime No.122/2012 pending consideration on the file of VI ACMM, Bangalore, are hereby quashed.”
5. Petitioner is accused No.2 in C.C.No.318/2011. In view of the fact that the parties have settled the dispute and this Court has quashed the proceedings against accused No.1, continuance of proceedings against the petitioner is uncalled for as it amounts to abuse of process of law. Resultantly, this petition merits consideration and it is accordingly allowed. Proceedings in C.C.No.318/2011 pending on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) & CJM, Kolar, are quashed.
No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE AV