IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE G.NARENDAR CRL.P. NO.5878/2017 BETWEEN 1. SMT. VANI W/O K N GIRISH AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R/AT C/O SATHYANARAYANA GUPTA, CLOTH MERCHANT, HOSUR, GOURIBIDANUR TALUK - 561210 CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT 2. SHANKAR NARAYANA RAO S/O MADHAJIRAO AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/AT BALAGERI, RAMANAGARA TOWN-562159, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.
...PETITIONERS (BY SRI ROOPESHA B, ADV.) AND 1. STATE BY IJOOR POLICE STATION RAMANAGARA TOWN RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562159 REPT BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU-01.
2. K N GIRISH S/O LATE P V NAGARAJSHETTY AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT MANDIPET, RAMANAGARA TOWN - 562159 RAMANAGARA DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP FOR R1, SRI RAMESH P.KULKARNI, ADV. FOR R2.) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE REGISTRATION OF THE FIR COMPLAINT DATED 19.11.2013 IN CR.NO.164/2013 REGISTERED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT POLICE AGAINST THE PETITIONERS VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND C AND THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.927/2016 WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) AND JMFC, RAMANAGARA AGAINST THE PETITIONERS VIDE ANNEXURE-A.
THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the respondent.
2. The first petitioner and the second respondent- complainant are present. The first Petitioner and the second respondent-complainant are wife and husband. That on account of certain matrimonial disputes, differences arose between the parties which led to the filing of a complaint and lodging of prosecution by the first respondent-police. It is submitted that thereafter, in the matrimonial proceedings disputes were referred to Mediation and the first petitioner and the second respondent keeping in view their relationship resolved to mutually and amicably settle the problems that had arisen between them and in that regard have entered into an agreement before the Mediators. Affidavits of the first petitioner and the second respondent are filed, wherein they have averred that keeping in view the relationship subsisting between the parties, they do not wish to continue with the prosecution as they have amicably resolved the differences amongst themselves. Though the first respondent police have filed a charge sheet for the offences punishable under Section 465, 468, 420, 471 and 506 read with 34 of IPC, some of the offences charge sheeted are not the compoundable offences. Though they are not compoundable, keeping in view the law 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, in paragraph 58, the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that, in disputes, involving persons, as similarly situated as the petitioner and second respondent and where the disputes is amongst the family members and the offences alleged are not heinous and the parties keeping in view the nature of relationship do not intend to further prosecute the matter, it would not serve any purpose to keep such prosecution on Board as it would ultimately resolve in acquittal of the party. Keeping in view the dictum of the Hon’ble Apex Court as set- out above, the petition is allowed.
3. The proceedings pending on the file of the Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Dn) and JMFC, Ramanagara registered in C.C. No.927/2016 stands quashed.
Sd/- JUDGE Chs*