Allowed

Sri. Ravi Shankar v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC21 Jul 2022CRL.P/266/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a criminal petition seeking quashing of proceedings under Section 482 CrPC. Despite the heinous nature of the alleged offence of rape under Section 376 IPC and SC/ST Act, the Court quashed the proceedings due to an amicable settlement reached after a misunderstanding. The Court held that a trial would be a futile exercise as the probability of conviction was rem

What did the court decide?

Impugned proceedings in Spl.C.C.No.167/2013 were quashed and the Criminal Petition was allowed.

Sri. Ravi Shankar Vs the State of Karnataka — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF JULY, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.266/2019

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. RAVI SHANKAR S/O. LATE KARISIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT ANJANANAGARA, MAGADI ROAD, BEL LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560 091.

¶9

SMT. BHADRAMMA W/O. LATE KARISIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, R/AT ANJANANAGARA, MAGADI ROAD, BEL LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560 091.

¶10

SMT. RANJITHA W/O. RAVI SHANKAR, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT HOLALKERE VILLAGE, ARUNULENURU, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, CHITHRADURGA-577 501.

¶11

...PETITIONERS

¶12

(BY SRI. H.C. SHIVARAMU, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR P-1; PETITION AS AGAINST P2 AND P3 DISPOSED OF ON 30.09.2021)

¶13

¶14

AND:

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY DODDABELAVANGALA POLICE STATION, REP. BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BANGALORE-560 001.

¶16

SMT. MADHU W/O. PRAKASH PATIL @ RAKESH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/AT DODDABELAVANGALA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE-561 204.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI ROHITH B.J., HCGP FOR R-1; SRI BHARATH KUMAR V., ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN SPL.C.C.NO.167/2013 PENDING ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU FOR AN OFFENCE P/U/S 506, 504, 376, 313 AND 323 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(2)(5) OF SC/ST ACT 1989 BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION AND ETC.

¶20

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

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

The Police after investigation submitted the charge sheet

¶23

alleging that accused No.1 committed forcible intercourse with

¶24

¶25

respondent No.2 and refused to marry her and also forced to terminate the pregnancy.

¶26

The learned Sessions Judge accepted the charge sheet for the offence punishable under sections 506, 504, 376, 313, 323 of IPC and under Section 3(2) and (5) of SC & ST Act 1989 and issued summons. Taking exception of the same, accused No.1 is before this Court.

¶27

Accused No.1 and respondent No.2, the defacto complainant have filed an application under Section 320 r/w Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for compounding of the offence in view of the settlement arrived between the parties. The said application and also the affidavit filed by accused No.1 and respondent No.2 are placed in record.

¶28

4 Learned HCGP appearing for the State submits that accused No.1 has committed heinous crime and the offences alleged against the accused No.1 are not cognizable and the said application for compounding of the offence requires to be rejected.

¶29

¶30

The parties are present before this Court. The application for compounding of the offence is filed by the accused No.1 and the respondent No.2 without there being any undue influence and coercive. Perusal of the application filed for compounding of the offences indicates that due to some financial disputes and misunderstanding in the both the families for certain amount, the respondent No.2 lodged the FIR against the accused No.1 and with the intervention of well wishers and friends, the parties have amicably settled the dispute between them.

¶31

Though the offences alleged against the accused No.1 are cognizable and non-bailable, however, having regard to the fact that the parties have amicably settled the dispute between the parties, it will be a futile exercise, if accused No.1 is subjected to trial since the probability of conviction of the accused No.1 is remote and bleak. It would be appropriate to quash the impugned proceedings so as to prevent an abuse of process of law. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶32

¶33

ORDER

¶34

i. Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶35

ii. The impugned proceedings in Spl.C.C.No.167/2013 on the file of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District is hereby quashed.

¶36

Sd/JUDGE

¶37

HR

Sri. Ravi Shankar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Ravi Shankar v. the 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

Abdul Rehaman Vs H B Mohammed

Sri N G Chandregowda Vs State by Saraswathipuram Police Station

J Gnanendra Kumar Vs the Chief Secretary

M/S Mahaveer Traders Vs the Director of Agriculture Marketing

Smt Meenakumari Vs Sri Siddappa Chandappa

Mr. Achuta Bhat Vs State of Karnataka through