IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.302/2019 BETWEEN 1. SRI.VIKAS JAISWAL, S/O RAJENDRA JAISWAL, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, 2. SRI.RAJENDRANATH JAISWAL, S/O B.B.JAISWAL, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, 3. SMT.VEENA KUMARI, W/O RAJENDRA JAISWAL, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, ALL RESIDING AT NO.40(A), 1ST CROSS, E-MAIN ROAD, 4TH T BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 041.
... PETITIONERS (BY SRI. JAIRAJ G., ADV.) AND 1. SMT. AMBIKA DHAWAN, W/O VIKAS JAISWAL, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, RESIDING AT G1, FORT HOUSE, SURVEY NO.34/1, NEAR TATANAGAR, KODIGEHALLI, BENGALURU – 560 092.
2. STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY THILAKNAGAR POLICE STATION, BANGALORE CITY, BENGALURU – 560 041. REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560 001.
(BY SMT. RAMA R IYER, ADV., FOR R1;
... RESPONDENTS SRI. S.CHANDRASHEKARAIAH, HCGP FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CR.NO.234/2017 (C.C.NO.33855/2018) PENDING ON THE FILE OF II A.C.M.M., BANGALORE ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Petitioners who have been arraigned as accused Nos.1 to 3 in C.C.No.33855/2018 (arising out of Crime No.234/2017) registered by Thilaknagar P.S. for offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 504, 506, 323 IPC r/w Sections 3 and 4 of the D.P. Act, and pending on the file of 2nd Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City have sought for quashing of said proceedings.
2. First petitioner herein got married to the first respondent on 05.12.2013. She is said to have given birth to a male child. On account of certain disputes having arisen between them, they have been residing separately. Alleging that she has been harassed mentally, physically and assaulted with a demand for dowry, complaint came to be lodged by the first respondent on 08.06.2017, before the Thilaknagar Police, which was registered in Crime No.234/2017 for the aforesaid offences. After investigation, charge-sheet came to be filed in C.C.No.33855/2018. Simultaneously, first respondent herein also filed a petition for dissolution of marriage with the first petitioner under Section 13 (1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in M.C.No.987/2018. Said proceedings was referred to Bengaluru Mediation Centre to explore the possibility of settlement. In the mediation, parties have reached agreement/ settlement and accordingly, memorandum of settlement has been drawn under Section 89 of CPC r/w Rules 24 and 25 of the Karnataka Civil Procedure (Mediation) Rules, 2005, which is produced at Annexure-‘E’ to the petition. Today, a joint memo has been filed which is duly signed by first petitioner and first respondent. Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are said to be the father and mother of first petitioner and it is reported that they are critically ill and as such, they are unable to appear before this court in person. In the joint memo filed, parties have reiterated what was stated in the memorandum of settlement arrived in M.C.No.987/2018 is true and correct. Pursuant to said settlement, marriage solemnized between first petitioner and first respondent herein has been dissolved by the IV Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, by judgment and decree dated 02.01.2019, which is at Annexure-‘F’.
3. First respondent-complainant who is present before court has not only agreed to withdraw the complaint, but has also stated that she has no objection to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.33855/2018 (arising out of Crime No.234/2017) pending on the file of 2nd Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City. She submits that out of her own free will, wish, volition, without there being any force, threat or coercion from anybody, she has entered into said settlement with the first petitioner and in view of marriage with the first petitioner having been put to an end, she is not inclined to proceed with the complaint. In the light of the aforestated submission made by the first respondent and in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, and the dispute in question mainly relates to a matrimonial dispute as observed hereinabove, which has come to an end, continuation of criminal proceedings against petitioners would only be an exercise in futility and would be waste of precious judicial time. That apart, first respondent herself has stated that she is not interested in prosecuting her complaint. Even in the event of trial being conducted, the prime witness, namely the complainant would definitely not support the case of the prosecution. As such, continuation of proceedings against the petitioners would be onerous and would not sub-serve the ends of justice. In that view of the matter, prayer sought for by the petitioners in this petition deserves to be granted.
4. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER (i) Criminal petition is allowed.
(ii) Proceedings pending in C.C.No.33855/2018 (arising out of Crime No.234/2017) on the file of 2nd Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 504, 506, 323 IPC r/w Sections 3 and 4 of the D.P. Act is hereby quashed and petitioners are acquitted of the aforesaid offences.
SD/-
JUDGE Np/-