Allowed

Sri Nagendra v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC19 Oct 2020CRL.P/5135/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners alleged settlement of disputes and mutual consent for divorce. The court accepted the joint memo and payment of compensation, holding that continuing proceedings would cause injustice. Consequently, the FIR and charge sheet for offences under IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act were quashed.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in Crime No.59/2019 for offences under Sections 498A, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act were quashed. Criminal Petition allowed.

Sri Nagendra Vs State of Karnataka — Dowry and Cruelty | Karnataka HC (2020)

¶1

CRL.P. No.5135 OF 2020

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2020

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5135 OF 2020

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI. NAGENDRA AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS S/O AMARA NARAYANA N.R. EXTENSION NEAR VASAVI TEMPLE RAMA MANDIRA CHINTAMANI

¶10

CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-562101

¶11

SRI. AMARA NARAYANA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS S/O N.R. EXTENSION NEAR VASAVI TEMPLE RAMA MANDIRA CHINTAMANI CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-562101

¶12

SMT. GEETHAVANI AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS W/O AMARA NARAYANA N.R. EXTENSION NEAR VASAVI TEMPLE RAMA MANDIRA CHINTAMANI CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-562101

¶13

SRI. TEJAS KUMAR AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS S/O AMARA NARAYANA N.R. EXTENSION NEAR VASAVI TEMPLE RAMA MANDIRA

¶14

CRL.P. No.5135 OF 2020

¶15

¶16

CHINTAMANI CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-562101 ... PETITIONERS

¶17

(BY SRI.B.R.VISWANATH, ADVOCATE)

¶18

AND:

¶19

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE BHARATHI NAGAR EAST ZONE WOMEN POLICE STATION BANGALORE-560005

¶20

SMT. N.K.ARKAJA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS W/O Y.A.NAGENDRA R/AT NO.51/16, 2^ND CROSS OSBORN ROAD, MUDILIYA SANGAM KODANDARAMA LAYOUT S.G. GARDEN, BANGALORE-560042 ... RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, HCGP FOR R1; SMT. DHANALAKSHMI.Y, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶22

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C, PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR AND CHARGE SHEET, IN CR.NO.59/2019 DATED 01.07.2019 AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.30228/2019 PENDING BEFORE THE VI A.C.M.M., AT BENGALURU WHICH ARE PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-D.

¶23

¶24

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

¶25

ORDER

¶26

The above proceedings arises out of a complaint

¶27

in Crime No.59/2019 of East Zone Women Police

¶28

Station for the offences punishable under Sections

¶29

CRL.P. No.5135 OF 2020

¶30

¶31

498A, 504, 506 of IPC and under Sections 3 and

¶32

4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, pending on the file of VI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.

¶33

The petitioners and respondent No.2 have filed a joint memo stating that disputes between themselves have been settled. In view of said settlement, petitioner No.1 has paid a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- by way of a demand draft which has been verified by counsel for respondent No.2 and confirmed to have been received by respondent No.2 today.

¶34

Petitioner No.1- husband and respondent No.2wife submit that they have agreed for dissolution of their marriage by way of mutual consent towards which they are going to make necessary statement during mediation proceedings before the trial Court in M.C.No.6941/2019 which is pending. They further submit that they have no

¶35

CRL.P. No.5135 OF 2020

¶36

¶37

children out of their wedlock, that all the disputes between themselves have been settled and items have been exchanged between themselves and there are no claims between each other.

¶38

The parties are physically present before this Court and are identified by their respective advocates. Petitioners being identified by Mr.B.R.Vishwanath, counsel for petitioners, who is present today and respondent No.2 being identified by Smt.Dhanalakshmi Y., counsel for respondent No.2 who is also present today.

¶39

Accepting the said submissions and the joint memo, I am of the considered opinion that continuation of the proceedings would cause injustice to both the parties. Hence, the proceedings in Crime No.59/2019 of East Zone Women Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 504, 506 of IPC and under Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act,

¶40

CRL.P. No.5135 OF 2020

¶41

¶42

pending on the file of VI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru in C.C.No.30228/2019 are quashed. Criminal

¶43

Petition is allowed.

¶44

Sd/JUDGE

¶45

Prs*

Sri Nagendra v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Nagendra v. State of Karnataka

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

Dr Poonam a Naik Vs State by Basavanagudi Women Ps

Mr Chandrashekar Reddy Vs the State of Karnataka

Mani Vs State of Karnataka by

Kalimada Subbaiah @ Dharmesh Vs the State of Karnataka by

Sumith Jain Vs State by Halasuru Police

Lohith S Vs the State of Karnataka