IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION No. 6425 OF 2017 BETWEEN:
1. SURAMYA TOMAR S/O WING COMMANDER SS TOMAR(RETD) AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/AT N-74, DIAMOND DISTRICT OLD AIRPORT ROAD BANGALORE – 560 017 2. SAHADEV SINGH TOMAR S/O SHERU SINGH TOMAR WING COMMANDER R/AT NO.B-152, SNARE NOIDA GAUTAM BUDDH NAGAR UTTAR PRADESH ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI. ARUN L GOVINDRAJ, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. L.GOVINDRAJ, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE BY AIRPORT POLICE STATION, HAL AIRPORT BANGALORE – 560 002 2. ANJALI MALIK W/O SURAMYA TOMAR AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS RESIDING AT NO. 74, DIAMOND DISTRICT OLD AIRPORT ROAD BENGALURU – 560 017 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIJAYAKUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. SPP FOR R1; R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS IN C.C.NO.53080/2016 PENDING BEFORE THE X ADDL.C.M.M., MAYOHALL, BANGALORE (ANNEXURES-A, B, C AND D).
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Petitioners have sought to quash the proceedings pending against them in C.C.No.53080/2016 on the file of X Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayohall, Bengaluru.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Addl. S.P.P.-2 for respondent no.1. Respondent no.2 is served and unrepresented.
3. Learned counsel for petitioners at the threshold has referred to the settlement arrived at between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 in M.C.No.849/2015, wherein respondent No.2 has agreed to the following terms:
“In view of the settlement arrived the parties undertake to approach the competent Forum/Court for appropriate reliefs/steps in C.C.No.53080/2016 pending on the file of 43rd ACMM, Bengaluru filed against the petitioner and his father u/s 498-A of IPC for closure/quashing of the same.”
Records indicate that pursuant to the settlement arrived at between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 in M.C.No.849/2015 the marriage between the petitioner and respondent no.2 solemnised on 13.1.2013 at New Delhi is dissolved by a decree of divorce. In view of this settlement continuance of the impugned proceedings would be nothing but an abuse of process of court.
In the result, the petition is allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No.53080/2016 pending on the file of X ACMM, Court, Mayohall, Bengaluru is quashed.
Sd/- JUDGE psg*