IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY , 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2488 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
SRI RANGEGOWDA S/O LATE NARASIMHAIAH AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/AT NO.17, APPASANDRA HADAVANAHALLI TAVAREKERE TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT- 572 211.
(BY SRI.S GIRISH, ADV.) AND:
1. SMT NETRAVATHI D/O K R NAGARAJ AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS R/AT NO.958/18 OPP. ESI HOSPITAL III BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR BANGALORE- 560 010.
2. STATE BY RAJAJINAGAR POLICE BANGALORE-560 010 REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA.
…PETITIONER … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI S. CHANDRASHEKARAIAH, HCGP FOR R-2 SRI.G.JAIRAJ, ADV. FOR R-1) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE CHARGE SHEET IN C.C.NO.8007/2016 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 RAJAJINAGAR POLICE, PENDING ON THE FILE OF IX ADDL. C.M.M., BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A, 506 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3 AND 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT, 1961 FILED AGAINST THE PETITIONER AND ETC., CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioner who is the sole accused in C.C. No.8007/2016 is seeking for quashing of said proceedings registered against him for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 506 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act pending on the file of IX ACMM, Bengalaru.
2. Marriage between petitioner and 1st respondent came to be solemnized on 28.11.2011 and out of said wedlock, a female child was born. On account of certain dispute having arisen between the parties to the marriage, they have been residing separately and on 03.12.2014, 1st respondent herein filed a complaint alleging that she was physically and mentally harassed with a demand for dowry and as such, FIR came to be registered in Crime No.258/2014 for the aforestated offences. On completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed and it is now pending in C.C. No.8007/2016. However, much prior to filing of the complaint, 1st respondent herein had filed a petition under Section 13(1) (ia) (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for dissolution of marriage solemnized on 28.11.2011. Said matter came to be referred to Mediation and parties have reached an agreement. Accordingly, memorandum of settlement under Section 89 of C.P.C. r/w Rules 24 and 25 of the Karnataka Civil Procedure (Mediation) Rules, 2005 came to be drawn and learned Family Judge has also accepted the same. On 04.02.2017, decree has been drawn and pursuant to same, marriage solemnized between the petitioner and 1st respondent came to be dissolved.
3. A perusal of said settlement arrived at between the parties would indicate that 1st respondent herein who was the petitioner in M.C. 5284/2016 has agreed for giving consent to quash the proceedings pending in C.C. No.8007/2016. Pursuant to same, both parties have appeared namely, petitioner and 1st respondent and they have filed a Joint Memo, whereunder they have reiterated the settlement arrived at between them and 1st respondent who is present before the Court today has submitted that she has no objection for quashing of the proceedings since matrimonial dispute has been settled and she does not intend to prosecute her complaint. She has made a categorical statement that she does not claim any maintenance either to herself or to her minor child (daughter).
4. 1st respondent - complainant and petitioner who are present before Court are identified by their learned advocates. 1st respondent has enclosed photocopy of identity card issued by the Election Commission of India and petitioner has enclosed photocopy of Aadhar card. In token of identifying the parties, learned advocates representing them have also signed the Joint Memo.
5. Second respondent also submits that out of her own and free will, volition and without any force, threat or coercion, she has affixed her signature to the Joint Memo.
6. In that view of the matter, there is no impediment to accept the joint memo. In the light of complainant-1st respondent and accused-petitioner having been arrived at a settlement and 1st respondent having expressed her willingness to quash the proceedings by keeping in mind the dicta laid down by the Hon’ble 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 proceedings against the petitioner would not serve any purpose. On the other hand, if it is continued, petitioner would be made to undergo the ordeal of trial, inasmuch as the complainant herself has withdrawn the allegations made against accused. Hence, this Court is of the considered view that it is a fit case which calls for exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction vested in this Court to quash the proceedings.
7. Hence, the following ORDER (i) Criminal Petition is allowed.
(ii) Proceeding pending in C.C. No.8007/2016 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 506 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act pending on the file of IX ACMM, Bengalaru is hereby quashed and petitioner is acquitted of said offences.
Sd/-
JUDGE BS