Allowed

Sri. Lala Naveen Kumar v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC17 Mar 2021CRL.P/545/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal petition under Section 482 CrPC sought to quash matrimonial proceedings involving alleged cruelty and dowry demands. The court allowed the petition after finding that the parties had compromised and a settlement amount had been paid. Relying on precedent, the court quashed the proceedings as the dispute was settled.

What did the court decide?

Consequently proceedings initiated against the petitioners in C.C.No.27946/2016 (Crime No.23/2016) for the offences punishable under Section 498A and 506 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibiti

Sri. Lala Naveen Kumar Vs State of Karnataka — Dowry and Cruelty | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION No.545 OF 2021

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

1 . SRI. LALA NAVEEN KUMAR S/O. SRI. LALA NARAYAN DAS, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS.

¶9

2 . SMT. LALA SUJATHA BAI W/O. SRI. LALA NARAYAN DAS, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.

¶10

3 . SRI. LALA NARAYANA DAS S/O. SRI. TULASI RAM, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS.

¶11

4 . SMT. LALA ROOPA RANI W/O. SRI. RAJARAM, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS.

¶12

5 . SRI. RAJA RAM LAL S/O. SRI. VITTAL LAL, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS.

¶13

ALL ARE RESIDING AT No.1, J. K. PARADISE, 6^TH CROSS, KAGGADASAPURA BENGALURU-560 093. ..PETITIONERS

¶14

(BY SMT. RAKSHA KEERTHANA K., FOR SRI KEMPARAJU, ADVOCATE)

¶15

¶16

AND:

¶17

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HALASURGATE WOMEN POLICE STATION, BENGALURU, REP. BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU-560 001. 2 . SMT. VARSHA NAVEEN W/O LALA NAVEEN KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, BUILDING No.16, DOOR No.1, 6^TH A CROSS, KAGGADASAPURA, C.V. RAMAN NAGARA, BENGALURU-560 093. ..RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP FOR R1, SRI VEERESHA K, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. BY THE ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONERS PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS IN C.C.No.27946/2016 (CR.No.23/2016) FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 498A, 506 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3 AND 4 OF D.P ACT PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE VI A.C.M.M. AT BENGALURU.

¶20

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

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

This petition is filed under Section 482 of the

¶23

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying this Court

¶24

¶25

to quash the FIR filed against the petitioners in Crime No.23 of 2016 dated 24.02.2016 by Halasurgate Women Police for the offences punishable under Sections 506 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶26

Factual matrix of the case is that respondent No.2 has filed complaint making allegation against petitioners herein that she was subjected to cruelty and caused life threat and obtained dowry and also demanded dowry. Based on the complaint, police have registered a case in Crime No.23/2016 and thereafter investigated the matter. Now the parties have compromised. As a result of compromise they have filed I.A.1/2021 under Section 320 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and prays to compound the offences invoked against the petitioners herein.

¶27

¶28

3. The respective counsel appearing for the

¶29

parties and as well as parties have filed joint affidavit and they have settled the matter amicably. In terms of the settlement an amount of Rs.14,00,000/- is paid to respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 is present before the court and acknowledged having received an amount of Rs.14,00,000/-.

¶30

Respective counsel also brought to the notice of the court that Annexure-E in M.C.No.5434/2019, a document of settlement arrived

¶31

invoking Section 89 of Civil Procedure Code and in terms of settlement the complainant agreed to withdraw the petition and also seek for quashing of the proceedings which is initiated against the petitioners herein.

¶32

¶33

Having perused the document Annexure-E

¶34

as well as affidavit of the parties and also respondent No.2 having acknowledged the amount, it is appropriate to quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioners herein. Since the dispute is matrimonial dispute, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 has held that offence is not against the Society at large but interse between the parties, court can compound the offence.

¶35

In view of the discussion made above, I proceed to pass the following:

¶36

ORDER

¶37

The petition is allowed. Consequently proceedings initiated against the petitioners in C.C.No.27946/2016 (Crime No.23/2016) for the offences punishable under Section 498A and 506 of

¶38

¶39

IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act is hereby quashed.

¶40

Sd/JUDGE

¶41

SBN

Sri. Lala Naveen Kumar v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Lala Naveen Kumar 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. Srinivas. v Vs State of Karnataka by

Sri K.S. Parveez Vs the State of Karnataka

Ramesh R, Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Shekhar G.M. Vs Shreyas Hind Chit India Pvt. Ltd.

Sri Machimada Gini Vs the State by

Dr Raghavendra K Vs State by Bangalore District Women'S Police Station