Allowed
Sri Manjunatha @ Manja v. the State of Karnataka
Karnataka HCCRL.P/8690/2016
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED…
What the court decided
AI extract
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED…
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2016
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY
CRIMINAL PETITION No.8690 OF 2016
BETWEEN:
Sri. Manjunatha @ Manja, Son of Mesthri Nagaraju, Aged about 37 years, Residing at Devegowdnakoppalu Village, Chinakurali Hobli, Pandavapura Taluk – 571 434. Mandya District.
…PETITIONER
(By Shri Swamy M.M., Advocate)
AND:
2
…RESPONDENTS
(By Shri Chetan Desai, Government Pleader for Respondent No.1;
Shri Hareesh Bhandary, Advocate for Respondent No.2)
This Criminal Petition filed under Section 482 code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.26/2011, pending before the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pandavapura, Mandya District for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 323 and 506 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Admission this day, the court made the following:
O R D E R
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
Counsel for the respondents.
second respondent.
3
had lodged a complaint on her behalf, alleging that the petitioner was guilty of offences punishable under Sections 506 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. It is in this background that the petitioner is before this court.
Recording this submission, the petition is summarily allowed and the proceedings pending against the petitioner in
4
CC No.26/2011 pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division) and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pandavapura, Mandya District stands quashed in the light of the judgment of the apex court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2012)10 SCC 303 following in Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2014)6 SCC 466.
Sd/- JUDGE
nv
2 issues framed by the court
Whether proceedings in C.C.No.26/2011 for offences under IPC Sections 498A, 323 and 506 can be quashed given the father’s admission of filing the complaint to check abuse rather than due to a serious
Whether the petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashal of proceedings should be allowed in light of the reconciled relationship between the parties.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gian Singh vs. State of PunjabFollowed¶33
(2012)10 SCC 303 · Who else cites this
Narinder Singh vs. State of PunjabFollowed¶33
(2014)6 SCC 466 · Who else cites this
Sri. Manjunatha @ Manja
The State of Karnataka
Smt. Hemalatha
Anand Byrareddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court