IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION No.8627/2015 BETWEEN:
Sri. Sudarshan Deshmukh, S/o. Sri. Aravind Deshmukh, Aged about 36 years, R/at No.1514, 3rd Cross, 8th Main, Near Vidyabharathi School, Kengeri Satellite Town, Bengaluru – 560 060. …Petitioner (By Sri. K. Varaprasad, Advocate) AND:
1. The State of Karnataka, Represented by its State Public Prosecutor, High Court Buildings, Bengaluru – 560 001. Through Kengeri Police.
2. Smt. Ashwini, D/o. Subhash Kulkarni, C/o. Sudheer, Aged about 33 years, R/at No.201, 2nd Floor, Gulmohar Residency, Kodigehalli Main Road, Bengaluru – 560 079. ...Respondents (By Sri. Vijayakumar Majage, Addl. SPP for R1; Sri. Dilraj Rohit, Advocate for R2 (Absent)) This Criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner in C.C.No.6552/2013 (in Cr.No.89/2012 of Kengeri Police, Bengaluru), on the file of the learned III Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.
This Criminal petition coming on for Admission, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Addl. SPP for respondent No.1. Counsel for respondent No.2 is absent.
2. Petitioner has sought to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.6552/2013 presently pending on the file of the LVI Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru. The said proceedings were initiated based on the complaint filed by respondent No.2 alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 498A and 506 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. After investigation, charge sheet has been laid against the petitioner for the above offences.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the dispute between the petitioner/accused and respondent No.2 has been settled in a Mediation in M.C.No.1386/2013 and parties have entered into Memorandum of Settlement under Section 89 r/w Rules 24 and 25 of the Karnataka Civil Procedure (Mediation) Rules, 2005.
4. Certified copy of the Memorandum of Settlement dated 08.12.2014 is produced along with the petition. Clause 9 of the settlement reads as under:
“9. This apart, both the parties hereby agree and undertake to approach the competent forum for appropriate relief in respect of the case in C.C.No.6552/2013 pending on the file of the III Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore and the respondent-wife also agrees to co-operate with the petitioner-husband for the disposal/closure of the same.”
5. Petitioner has also produced the final order passed by the Matrimonial Court based on the aforesaid compromise, which indicate that the settlement arrived at by the parties is accepted by the Matrimonial Court. As a result, respondent No.2 is bound by the aforesaid settlement. Since by virtue of the said settlement, respondent No.2 has agreed to withdraw the allegations made against the petitioner and has agreed for closure of the complaint, it would be unjustified to continue the prosecution against the petitioner. In that view of the matter and in terms of the settlement arrived at between the petitioner and respondent No.2, petition is allowed. C.C.No.6552/2013 presently pending on the file of the LVI Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, is quashed.
Sd/- JUDGE SV