Allowed

Sri. Manjunath v. Smt. Sheela

Karnataka HC7 Jul 2021CRL.P/584/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed two criminal petitions filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings in CC.No.1924/2016 and Crl.Misc.No.202/2015. The court held that the dispute was matrimonial in nature, evidenced by a settlement agreement and mutual consent divorce filing.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the proceedings in C.C.No.1924/2016 before VI A.C.M.M., Bangalore and the proceedings in Crl.Misc.No.202/2015 before MMTC-I, Mayo Hall.

Sri. Manjunath Vs Smt. Sheela — Dowry and Cruelty | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

Crl.P.No.584/2017 c/w Crl.P.No.585/2017

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF JULY 2021

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION No.584/2017 c/w CRIMINAL PETITION No.585/2017

¶8

IN CRL.P.NO.584/2017

¶9

BETWEEN :

¶10

SRI. MANJUNATH, S/O LATE CHANDRU, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,

¶11

SMT. NAGAMMA, W/O LATE CHANDRU, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,

¶12

SRI. RAMACHANDRA, S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,

¶13

SMT. RADHA, W/O RAMACHANDRA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,

¶14

ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.27, PIPE LANE, BASAPPA GARDEN, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU – 560 003.

¶15

… PETITIONERS

¶16

(BY SRI. L. SUDHARSHAN, ADVOCATE (PH))

¶17

AND :

¶18

SMT. SHEELA, W/O MANJUNATHA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,

¶19

Crl.P.No.584/2017 c/w Crl.P.No.585/2017

¶20

¶21

R/AT NO.19, 1ST PHASE, 1ST CROSS, COX TOWN, JEEVANAHALLI, BENGALURU – 560 005.

¶22

STATE BY HALASUR GATE WOMEN POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT, BENGALURU – 560 001 … RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI A.N.RADHAKRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R1-(VC); SRI. K.S.ABHIJITH, HCGP FOR R2 (PH))

¶24

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET IN C.C.NO.1924/2016 ON THE FILE OF HALASURU GATE WOMEN POLICE STATION AND PENDING ON THE FILE OF VI A.C.M.M., BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 498(A), 506 OF IPC AND SEC. 3 AND 4 OF D.P.ACT.

¶25

IN CRL.P.NO.585/2017

¶26

BETWEEN :

¶27

SRI. MANJUNATH S/O LATE CHANDRU, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,

¶28

SMT. NAGAMMA, W/O LATE CHANDRU, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,

¶29

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.27, PIPE LANE, BASAPPA GARDEN, MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU - 560 003. … PETITIONERS

¶30

(BY SRI. L.SUDHARSHAN, ADVOCATE (PH))

¶31

AND :

¶32

SMT. SHEELA, W/O MANJUNATHA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,

¶33

Crl.P.No.584/2017 c/w Crl.P.No.585/2017

¶34

¶35

BABY RASHMI, D/O MANJUNATH, AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS, REPRESENTED BY R1,

¶36

BOTH ARE R/AT NO. 19, 1ST PHASE, 1ST CROSS, COX TOWN, JEEVANAHALLI BENGALURU - 560 005. …RESPONDENTS

¶37

(BY SRI A.N.RADHAKRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R1(VC); SRI. K.S.ABHIJITH, HCGP FOR R2 (PH))

¶38

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN CRL.MISC.NO.202/2015 PENDING ON THE FILE OF LEARNED MMTC-I, MAYO HALL, BANGALORE.

¶39

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

¶40

O R D E R

¶41

Learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶42

HCGP are present. Respondent No.1 in Crl.P.No.585/2017 is the minor guardian of respondent No.2 in the said case and respondent No.1 in Crl.P.No.584/2017. The said respondent and her Counsel are virtually present. She is duly identified by her Advocate.

¶43

Learned counsel for the petitioners and respondents in Crl.P.No.585/2017 and respondent No.1 in Crl.P.No.584/2017 submit the application under

¶44

Crl.P.No.584/2017 c/w Crl.P.No.585/2017

¶45

¶46

Section 320(2) r/w Section 482 of Cr.P.C. along with the Joint affidavit of petitioner No.1 & respondent No.1, the copies of order sheet in MC No.2003/2019 and memorandum of settlement between the parties in M.C.No.2003/2019.

¶47

It is submitted that petitioner No.3 in Crl.P.No.584/2017 is no more therefore petition of petitioner No.3 is abated. Petitioner No.1 is the son of petitioner No.2, Petitioner No.3 is the relative of Petitioner No.1 and Petitioner No.4 is the wife of the petitioner No.3.

¶48

For the purpose of convenience, the parties will be referred to henceforth as per their ranks in Crl.P.No.584/2017. The marriage of petitioner No.1 with respondent No.1 was solemnized on 27.08.2009. Out of the said marriage, baby Rashmi who is respondent No.2 in Crl.P.No.585/2017 was born. At the time of filing this petition, she was six years old. Couple had troubled marriage.

¶49

Crl.P.No.584/2017 c/w Crl.P.No.585/2017

¶50

¶51

5. Respondent No.1 filed complaint in Halsur

¶52

gate Women Police Station against the petitioners alleging that they subjected her to physical & mental cruelty in connection with their demand for dowry. On the basis of that complaint, on 26.06.2015 police registered FIR in Cr.No.53/2015 as per Annexure-A. On investigation, the police filed charge sheet against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 506 IPC, 3 & 4 of DP Act.

¶53

The trial Court took cognizance and

¶54

registered the case in CC.No.1924/2016 and summoned the petitioners to take up the trial.

¶55

Respondent No.1 along with her child filed Crl.Misc.No.202/2015 against the petitioners before MMTC, Mayohall, Bangalore alleging domestic violence and seeking various reliefs under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short ‘D.V. Act’)

¶56

Crl.P.No.584/2017 c/w Crl.P.No.585/2017

¶57

¶58

Petitioner No.1 filed MC No.3744/2013 against respondent No.1 for restitution of conjugal rights. Pending these petitions, it appears that parties entered into the settlement. Thereafter, petitioner No.1 and respondent No.1 filed MC No.2003/2019 before II Additional Principal Judge, the Family Court, Bangalore for dissolution of their marriage by mutual consent.

¶59

In M.C. No.2003/2019 during the Mediation, couple have entered into a memorandum of settlement. The copy of the said Memorandum of the settlement shows that the first respondent has agreed to give up her claims against the petitioners receiving Rs.10,00,000/- towards maintenance of the child and Rs.5,00,000/- as permanent alimony for her.

¶60

The copy of the Memorandum of Settlement shows that petitioner No.1 has already paid Rs.10,00,000/- to respondent No.1 by Demand Draft dated 04.03.2021 drawn on State Bank of India, Malleshwaram Branch, Bangalore towards payment of the maintenance of the child. Respondent No.1 admits

¶61

Crl.P.No.584/2017 c/w Crl.P.No.585/2017

¶62

¶63

that today she has received demand draft for Rs.5,00,000/- drawn on State Bank of India, Malleshwaram Branch, Bangalore. She further submits that she has no objection for quashing the impugned proceedings.

¶64

The above facts & circumstances go to show that the dispute between the parties is admittedly the matrimonial dispute and that was given the color of criminal proceedings.

¶65

Having regard to the settlement entered into between the parties even if the impugned proceedings pending before the trial court were to continue, they serve no purpose. Therefore, the petition is allowed.

¶66

The impugned proceedings in CC.No.1924/2016 before VI A.C.M.M., Bangalore and the proceedings in Crl.Misc.No.202/2015 pending on the file of MMTC-I, Mayo Hall, are hereby quashed.

¶67

Sd/JUDGE

¶68

Sri. Manjunath v. Smt. Sheela

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Manjunath v. Smt. Sheela

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

R. Naveen Vs M. Venugopal

Sri v Muniyappa Vs State of Karnataka

Sri B L Girija Shanker Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Surendra Shetty Vs the State of Karnataka by

Kumar Vs Chikkalingaiah

Sri H C Lokesh Vs the State by Sub Inspector of Police