Allowed

T R Prema v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC19 Apr 2021CRL.P/2871/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Karnataka High Court allowed two criminal petitions filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to compound offences under Sections 498A and the Dowry Prohibition Act. Citing Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, the Court held that since the dispute was matrimonial and parties had settled with compensation, the proceedings were quashed.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in C.C.No.16481/2013 and C.C.No.30550/2014 quashed; offence compounded on payment of Rs.30,00,000 as permanent alimony.

T R Prema Vs State of Karnataka — Dowry and Cruelty | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2870/2021 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2871/2021

¶7

IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2870/2021:

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

T.R. PREMA, W/O T.M. SADANANDA, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, NO.838, 17^TH F MAIN ROAD, 5^TH BLOCK, RAJAJI NAGAR, BENGLAURU NORTH, RAJAJI NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 010.

¶10

AND ALSO R/O NO.107/1, 1^ST BLOCK, 1^ST MAIN, NEAR NAVARANGA TAKIES, BENGALURU CITY-560010.

¶11

MAMATHA @ MAMTHA VIJAYAKUMAR, W/O VIJAYAKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, NO.3/4, 134 A KALAMPLAYAM, METTUPALYAM, SEEJIYUR, COIMBATORE, TAMILNADU-641113.

¶12

AND ALSO R/O NO.107/1, 1^ST BLOCK, 1^ST MAIN, NEAR NAVARANGA TAKIES, BENGALURU CITY-560010. … PETITIONERS (BY SRI ANAND R.V., ADVOCATE)

¶13

¶14

AND:

¶15

STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY SUBRAMANYA NAGARA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY, BENGALURU. REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ATTACHED TO HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BENGALURU CITY-560001.

¶16

SMT. VATHSALA T, W/O LATE PRAVEEN S, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O NO.107/1, 1^ST BLOCK, 1^ST MAIN, NEAR NAVARANGA THEATRE, RAJAJI NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 010. … RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI H.R. SHOWRI, HCGP FOR R-1; SMT. ANJANA SUNDAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.16481/2013 INITIATED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 (SUBHRAHMANYA NAGAR POLICE IN CR.NO.164/2013) FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 498A, 323, 504, 506 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3 AND 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT ON THE FILE OF THE XXXIX ACMM AT BENGALURU.

¶19

IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2871/2021:

¶20

BETWEEN:

¶21

T.R. PREMA, W/O T.M. SADANANDA, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, NO.838, 17^TH F MAIN ROAD, 5^TH BLOCK, RAJAJI NAGAR, BENGLAURU NORTH, RAJAJI NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 010.

¶22

¶23

AND ALSO R/O NO.107/1, 1^ST BLOCK, 1^ST MAIN, NEAR NAVARANGA TAKIES, BENGALURU CITY-560010. … PETITIONER

¶24

(BY SRI ANAND R.V., ADVOCATE)

¶25

AND:

¶26

STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY SUBRAMANYA NAGARA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY, BENGALURU. REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ATTACHED TO HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BENGALURU CITY-560001.

¶27

SMT. VATHSALA T, W/O LATE PRAVEEN S, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O NO.107/1, 1^ST BLOCK, 1^ST MAIN, NEAR NAVARANGA THEATRE, RAJAJI NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 010.

¶28

… RESPONDENTS

¶29

(BY SRI H.R. SHOWRI, HCGP FOR R-1; SMT. ANJANA SUNDAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

¶30

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.30550/2014 INITIATED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 (SUBHRAHMANYA NAGAR POLICE IN CR.NO.191/2014) FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 498A, 323, 504, 506 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3 AND 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT ON THE FILE OF THE XXXIX ACMM AT BENGALURU.

¶31

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

¶32

¶33

O R D E R

¶34

Crl.P.No.2870/2021 is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying this Court to quash C.C.No.16481/2013 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act on the file of the XXXIX ACMM, Bengaluru.

¶35

Crl.P.No.2871/2021 is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying this Court to quash C.C.No.30550/2014 for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC on the file of the XXXIX ACMM, Bengaluru.

¶36

The factual matrix of the case is that respondent No.2 had lodged a complaint against these petitioners and based on the complaint, two cases are registered. The police after the investigation have filed the charge-sheet for the above offences.

¶37

Now the parties have settled the matter and filed the application in both the petitions invoking Section 320(2) read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying the Court to permit them to compound the offence on the ground that on the advise of the panchayatdars and well wishers they have amicably compromised the matter and there is harmonious relationship

¶38

¶39

between them and no grievances against respondent No.2. The complainant has received an amount of Rs.30,00,000/- as full and final settlement towards permanent alimony. The learned counsel for respondent No.2 does not dispute the same. Respondent No.2 is also present before the Court and acknowledges the receipt of Rs.30,00,000/-.

¶40

The dispute between the parties is a matrimonial dispute and the offences invoked against the petitioners are interse between the parties and the same is not against the Society at large and in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of GIAN SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 , the offences can be compounded if it is a matrimonial dispute.

¶41

In view of the discussions made above, I pass the

¶42

following:

¶43

ORDER

¶44

(i) The applications filed under Section 320(2) read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking permission to compound the offences, are allowed.

¶45

¶46

(ii) Consequently, the petitions are allowed.

¶47

(iii) The proceedings initiated against the petitioners in C.C.No.16481/2013 and C.C.No.30550/2014 are hereby quashed.

¶48

Sd/JUDGE

¶49

T R Prema v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T R Prema 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Vivek H K Vs the State of Karnataka

D v Yashwanth Kumar Vs State by Sakalespura Town Police Station

Sri Venkatesh Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. B. R. Prabhakara Vs State of Karnataka

Mr. Raghuram K Beluru Vs the State of Karnataka

Shivarama Naik Vs State of Karnataka