IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH, 2018 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.837/2018 BETWEEN:
1. SRI. THIMME GOWDA D.L.
S/O. LATE LAKSHMAN GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, 2. SRI. T. SRINIVAS S/O.THIMME GOWDA D.L. AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF NO.3/4, 2ND CROSS, AJJAPPA BLOCK, DINNUR, R.T.NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 032 (BY SRI. SUDARSHAN L., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY R.T.NAGAR POLICE STATION, BENGALURU, REP. BY S.P.P.HIGH COURT, BANGALORE – 560 001 2. SMT. PALLAVI W/O.BHARATH, AGEDA BOUT 27 YEARS, 3. SRI.BHARATH S/O. THIMME GOWDA D.L.
... PETITIONERS AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3 ARE RESIDENTS OF NO.3/4, 2ND CROSS, AJJAPPA BLOCK, DINNUR, R.T.NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 032 (BY SRI.S.RACHAIAH, HCGP FOR R-1) ... RESPONDENTS THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.No.25165/2016 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 324, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC ON THE FILE OF R.T.NAGAR POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY AND PENDING ON THE FILE OF LEARNED VIII A.C.M.M. AT BENGALURU.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER First petitioner and respondent Nos.2 & 3 are present before Court. A Joint Memo is filed by first petitioner and respondent Nos.2 & 3 stating thereunder that they have resolved their disputes and differences with the intervention of well wishers.
2. Said Joint Memo is also accompanied by affidavits of first petitioner and respondent Nos.2 & 3 whereunder they have reiterated the contents of the compromise petition. Photocopies of identity cards of parties issued by the statutory authority are also annexed to said Joint Memo. Since first petitioner is none other than father-in-law of second respondent and father of third respondent and dispute amongst them having been resolved, no purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings against first petitioner. Hence, this court is of the considered view that Joint Memo filed along with affidavits deserves to be accepted, since continuation of present proceedings would not be in the interest of family members and it would amount to abuse of process of law and it would also not sub- serve the ends of justice, inasmuch as, complainant /second respondent herein being daughter-in-law of first petitioner having agreed to withdraw the allegations made by her against first petitioner. Further continuation of proceedings before trial Court would be waste of judicial time.
For the reasons aforestated, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER (i) Criminal petition filed by first petitioner is hereby allowed.
(ii) Proceedings initiated by second respondent against first petitioner now pending in C.C.No.25165/2016 on the file of 8th ACMM, Bangalore, insofar as it relates to first petitioner (accused No.1) is concerned, is hereby quashed.
(iii) First petitioner (accused No.1) is acquitted of the offence punishable under Sections 324, 354, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 IPC.
(iv) It is made clear that present petition is kept alive and would continue insofar as second petitioner is concerned.
SD/- JUDGE DR