Allowed

Renold Raj Devaraj v. the State of Karnataka by

Karnataka HC15 Oct 2020CRL.P/4515/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka, in a criminal petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., quashed proceedings in a criminal complaint registered under Section 498-A IPC. The court noted that the parties had settled their dispute and the marriage was dissolved, making the continuation of proceedings unjust.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings in C.C.No.5148/2019 pending before I Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bangalore Rural District, registered for the offence punishable under Section 498-A of IPC were quashed.

Renold Raj Devaraj Vs the State of Karnataka by — Matrimonial and Divorce | Karnataka HC (2020)

¶1

CRL.P. No.4515/2020

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2020

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION No.4515 OF 2020

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

RENOLD RAJ DEVARAJ @ RENOLD RAJ S/O TC DEVARAJ AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS RESIDING AT: 102, GROUND FLOOR SRINIVASA RESIDENCY 18^TH MAIN, 5^TH CROSS HAL II STAGE BANGALORE-560008 ... PETITIONER (BY SMT.AARTI MUNDKUR, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY WHITE FIELD POLICE STATION REP. BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE-560001

¶12

MAGDLINE JOICE D'SOUZA D/O DOMINIC D'SOUZA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS RESIDING AT: BALAJI PRISTINE B BLOCK, 804 OPPOSITE GANESH TEMPLE BANGALORE-560066 ... RESPONDENTS

¶13

(BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. B.J. MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶14

CRL.P. No.4515/2020

¶15

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.5148/2019 PENDING ON THE FILE OF I ADDL. C.J.M., BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498-A OF IPC.

¶17

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The above petition is filed seeking for quashing of the proceedings in C.C.No.5148/2019 registered for the offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC pending on the file of I Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore.

¶21

The petitioner and respondent No.2 i.e., the parties as also their respective counsel are before this Court through video conferencing and submit that the dispute between them have been settled.

¶22

The marriage between the petitioner and respondent No.2 has been dissolved by way of a

¶23

CRL.P. No.4515/2020

¶24

¶25

decree passed in M.C.No.325/2020 on 8th October 2020. Mrs.Magdline Joice D'Souza, respondent No.2 who is identified by Sri.B.J.Mahesh, learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that she has no further claim as against the petitioner, all the jewellery have been exchanged and she has received the maintenance amount due to her. Sri.Renold Raj Devaraj, the petitioner is identified by his Counsel Smt.Aarti Mundkur, learned counsel for petitioner. He submits that there are no pending disputes between himself and respondent No.2.

¶26

Recording their presence through video conferencing and accepting the submission made by them, the proceedings in C.C.No.5148/2019 registered for the offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC pending on the file of I Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore is quashed since the

¶27

CRL.P. No.4515/2020

¶28

¶29

continuation of the same would not be in the interest of either the petitioner or respondent No.2 and continuation of the same would cause injustice to them.

¶30

5. Criminal Petition is allowed .

¶31

Sd/JUDGE

¶32

Prs*

Renold Raj Devaraj v. the State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Renold Raj Devaraj v. the State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Sharadamma Vs the State of Karnataka

Mohammed Sharief @ Khasim Vs the State of Karnataka

Paul Vincent S/O Vincent, C.P, Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Gowramma Vs the State of Karnataka

Deepa Rai Nonso Vs State of Karnataka by

Sandesh v Patkar Vs the State of Karnataka