Allowed

Sri Saurabh Shekhar v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC3 Dec 2021CRL.P/1493/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, accused in a matrimonial dispute, filed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the FIR and criminal proceedings. The Court allowed the petition, finding that the dispute had been settled through mediation with the second respondent withdrawing allegations, and ordered the quashing of proceedings to restore harmony.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the criminal proceedings (C.C.No.11142/2020) against the petitioners and disposed of the IA nos. 1/2020.

Sri Saurabh Shekhar Vs State of Karnataka — Matrimonial and Divorce | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 03^RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION No.1493 OF 2021

¶7

BETWEEN

¶8

Sri Saurabh Shekhar, S/o Sri Ram Pariksha Singh, Aged about 32 years, Residing at: No.6, Ground Floor, Anjanappa Layout, Horamavu Village, K.R.Puram, Bangalore – 560043.

¶9

Sri Ram Pariksha Singh, S/o Sri Ram Swarup Singh, Aged about 60 years, Residing at: Flat No.K-103, NTPC VIHAR, Phase-3, Ambedkar Path, Rukanpura, Patna – 800014.

¶10

Sri Sunita Singh, W/o Sri. Ram Pariksha Singh, Aged about 54 years, Residing at: Flat No.K-103, NTPC VIHAR, Phase-3, Ambedkar Path, Rukanpura, Patna – 800014.

¶11

Sri Jagriti Singh, D/o Sri Ram Pariksha Singh, Aged about 29 years,

¶12

¶13

Residing at: Flat No.102, Sri Vinayaka Residency, 3^rd Main Road, Konena Agrahara, Bangalore – 560 017.

¶14

…Petitioners

¶15

(By Sri Harikesh Singh, Advocate)

¶16

AND

¶17

State of Karnataka by White Field P.S., Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court Building, Bangalore – 560 001.

¶18

Smt. Samiksha Kumari, W/o Sri Saurabh Shekhar, D/o Sri Arun Kumar Das, Aged about 30 years, Residing at No.106, SMR Flora, Behind HDFC Bank Lane, Bommanahalli, Begur Hobli, Bangalore – 560 068.

¶19

…Respondents (By Sri.Mahesh Shetty, HCGP for R1, Smt. Akshata Gajanan Naik, Advocate for Sri Kapil Dixit, Advocate for R2)

¶20

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., praying to quash the entire proceedings vide Annexure-B in FIR in CR.No.533/2019 dated 27.12.2019 on the file of I Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru for the offence P/U/S 498(A) of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of D.P.Act.

¶21

This Criminal Petition coming on for admission this day, the Court made the following:

¶22

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Heard Sri. Harikesh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt. Akshata Gajanan Naik, learned counsel for Sri.Kapil Dixit, counsel for respondent no.2.

¶25

In this petition under section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioners being accused 1 to 4 in Cr.No.533/2019 have sought quashing of the FIR registered in relation to offences punishable under sections 498A IPC and sections 3 and 4 of D.P.Act. Now it is submitted that charge sheet is also filed and it is numbered as C.C.No.11142/2020 on the file of I Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru Rural District.

¶26

The first petitioner is the husband of second respondent. Their marriage was held on 24.11.2016 in Patna, Bihar State. Subsequently, because of differences between them, FIR was registered with the

¶27

¶28

first respondent – police. The first petitioner also initiated the proceedings for divorce by filing M.C.No.4301/2017 in the court of II Addl. Family Court, Bengaluru. The parties were referred to mediation in the divorce proceedings. In the mediation process, they were able to arrive at a settlement, according to which the first petitioner and the second respondent have severed their matrimonial relationship. The second respondent has agreed to receive permanent alimony of Rs.10,00,000/- and withdraw the complaint against the petitioners. Mediation report is also produced.

¶29

The first petitioner is present with his advocate and the second respondent is also present with her advocate. The second respondent submits that she has withdrawn all the allegations against the petitioners and she has no objection for quashing the proceedings against them.

¶30

¶31

Since the dispute is matrimonial in nature

¶32

and that the same has been settled, the criminal proceedings against the petitioners can be quashed to bring harmony between the parties. Hence the following:

¶33

ORDER

¶34

Petition is allowed. The proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.11142/2020 on the file of I Addl.

¶35

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru Rural District are quashed.

¶36

In view of disposal of this petition, I.A.1/2020

¶37

does not survive for consideration. Hence it is also disposed of.

¶38

Sd/JUDGE

¶39

Sri Saurabh Shekhar v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Saurabh Shekhar 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

Mr H Suresh Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Thimmaraju Vs the State of Karnataka by

Chandrashekar. L Vs M. T. Krishnappa

Mr N S Rajesh Vs M/S Panchajanya Textiles

M/S Aviva Life Insurance Company India Limited Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Anand Bharadwaj Vs the State of Karnataka