IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9524/2018 BETWEEN:
1. JOSEPH (S.JOSEPH) S/O. LATE SANTHYAGO AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.1774/1, 11TH CROSS, ASHOKA PURAM, MYSORE PIN CODE-570008 PIN CODE NO.571426 2. GNANAMANI W/O. SADHAI NATHAN AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.1774/1, 11TH CROSS, ASHOKA PURAM, MYSORE PIN CODE 571426 ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI.RAJU C.N., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE BY MAHILA POLICE MYSORE, REP. BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE PIN CODE 560 001 2. SMT. JAYAMERI NIRMALA W/O.S.JOSEPH AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.1774/1, 11TH CROSS, ASHOKA PURAM, MYSORE PIN CODE 571426 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.CHANDRASHEKHARAIAH S, HCGP FOR R-1; SMT. POOJA KATTIMANI, ADVOCATE FOR R-2) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET FILED AGAINST THE PETITIONERS IN C.C.NO.38/2008 PENDING ON THE FILE OF IV ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MYSURU, ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.01/2008 OF MAHILA POLICE, MYSURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498(A) AND 506 R/W 34 OF IPC BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R This petition is filed for quashing of the proceedings in C.C.No.38/2018 pending on the file of II Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) & CJM, Mysore, which has been registered by Mahila Police Station, Mysore against petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC.
2. Second respondent herein claiming to be the wife of first petitioner, lodged a complaint on 03.01.2008 with the first respondent-police alleging that she got married to first petitioner about 20 years back and she has two (2) children born out of said wedlock. She has further stated that her husband suspecting chastity started harassing her mentally and physically and he used to consume alcohol and assault her. She has further alleged that mother and sister of first petitioner were instigating her husband to harass her and about nine (9) months back prior to lodging of complaint she and her children were taken to Delhi and without informing her first accused returned back to Mysore and as such, she had to struggle hard to return back to Mysore. She has further stated on 03.02.2007 accused persons came to her house and assaulted her and threatened to kill her by throwing stone on her. On these lines, a complaint came to be filed.
3. Today, a Joint Memo is filed by the petitioners and second respondent stating thereunder that they have amicably settled their disputes at the intervention of elders and well wishers and second respondent does not intend to proceed with the prosecution initiated by her against petitioners.
4. Second respondent – complainant is present before Court and reiterates the contents of Joint Memo. She submits that out of her own free will and volition, without any threat, force or coercion she has affixed her signature to the Joint Memo. She also submits that she does not intend to prosecute the proceedings initiated by her against the petitioners and proceedings pending against petitioners before trial Court may be quashed. Petitioners and second respondent have stated that at the intervention of elders dispute is settled and second respondent has no objection to quash the charge sheet filed against the petitioners.
5. Petitioners and second respondent are present before Court and they are identified by their learned Advocates. In token of having identified the parties present before Court, learned Advocates have also affixed their signatures to the Joint Memo. To establish their identities, the photocopies of Aadhar Cards of both parties issued by the statutory authorities are produced along with the Joint Memo.
6. In the light of aforestated facts and keeping in mind the principles 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 further proceedings against petitioners would not sub-serve the ends of justice and it would be an abuse of process of law. Hence, this Court finds there is no impediment to grant the prayer sought for.
Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) Criminal petition is hereby allowed.
(ii) Proceedings pending in C.C.No.38/2018 on the file of II Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) & CJM, Mysore, against petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC, is hereby quashed.
(iii) Petitioners are acquitted of the said offences.
SD/- JUDGE DR