IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23rd DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7673/2018 BETWEEN:
SRI. ASHOKA S/O. NANJUNDA REDDY, AGED 37 YEARS, RESIDENT OF NO.252, SRINIVASA REDDY BUILDING, COLLAHALLI MAIN ROAD, BOMMASANDRA POST, BANGALORE-560 099 (BY SRI. B.T. VENKATESH, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SHO, VARTHUR POLICE STATION, REP. BY SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING, CUBBON PARK, BANGALORE -560001 2. SMT. MAMATHA J W/O. ASHOK AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/A NO.1/128, 1ST FLOOR, KODATHI VILLAGE, KARMALARAM POST, SARJAPURA MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE-560035 ... PETITIONER ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.S.RACHAIAH, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI.D.K.SANDARSHINI, ADV. FOR R-2) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.1784/2015 COMPOUNDING THE OFFENCES INITIATED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1, WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE II A.C.J.M., BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A, 506 OF IPC AND SEC. 3, 4 OF D.P.ACT.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Petitioner who is arraigned as sole accused in C.C.No.1784/2015 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 506 r/w Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, pending on the file of II Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Bangalore Rural, Bangalore, is before this Court for quashing of said proceedings.
2. Marriage between petitioner and second respondent came to be solemnized on 16.05.2010 and due to certain differences of opinion parties are said to have been residing separately from 2013. Subsequently second respondent-wife lodged a complaint on 30.05.2014 with Varthur Police Station alleging that during subsistence of her marriage with petitioner she has been harassed physically and mentally with a demand for dowry and accordingly, FIR came to be registered in Crime No.116/2014 for the aforesaid offences. After completion of investigation charge sheet came to be filed. Hence, petitioner is before this Court for quashing of said proceedings.
3. Today a joint memo has been filed which is duly signed by petitioner and second respondent stating thereunder that both parties have settled their matrimonial dispute in M.C.No.2888/2015, which came to be referred to mediation and in the said mediation an agreement under Section 89 of CPC r/w Rules 24 and 25 of Karnataka Civil Procedure (Mediation) Rules, 2005, came to be entered into and all their disputes have been settled. It is also stated that complainant has agreed to withdraw the complaint lodged by her against petitioner, since she is not interested in prosecuting the same. An affidavit to said effect has also been filed. As agreed to under the joint memo a Demand Draft for `5 Lakhs has been handed over to second respondent by petitioner and she has acknowledged receipt of the same in Court and second respondent has also handed over key of the house where she was said to be residing by admitting she is not in possession of the same. Their submissions are placed on record.
4. Parties are present before Court and they admit the contents of joint memo. Second respondent who is present before Court submits that out of her own free will without any force, threat or coercion she has affixed her signature to the joint memo as well as affidavit and she does not intend to prosecute the complaint lodged by her and she has no objection for quashing of proceedings pending against petitioner. To establish the identity of parties present before Court, photocopies of identity cards issued by statutory authority has also been produced along with memo and in token of having identified them, respective learned Advocates have also affixed their signatures to the joint memo as well as photocopies of identity cards.
5. Keeping in mind the principles laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of GIAN SINGH vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 and in the light of this Court having ascertained from second respondent/complainant as to her willingness to withdraw the complaint and she having stated that without any force, threat or coercion she has affixed her signature to the joint memo, this Court is of the considered view that continuation of proceedings against petitioner would not be in the interest of justice particularly when complainant herself has retraced her steps by withdrawing the allegations made in the complaint and as such it would not sub serve the ends of justice and continuation of proceedings would only be waste of precious judicial time. Hence, this Court is of the considered view that petitioner is entitled to the relief sought for.
Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER (i) Criminal petition is allowed.
(ii) Proceedings pending against petitioner in C.C.No.1784/2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 506 r/w Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, by Varthur Police Station, pending on the file of II Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Bangalore Rural, Bangalore, is quashed and petitioner is acquitted of above said offence.
In view of petition having been allowed, I.A.No.1/2018 for stay does not survive for consideration and it is rejected.
SD/-
JUDGE DR