Quashed

Sridhar @ Sreedhara C v. State by

Karnataka HC18 Aug 2022CRL.P/5125/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka disposed of a criminal petition for quashing proceedings based on an amicable settlement between the petitioner (husband) and the second respondent (wife), terminating the criminal case initiated for IPC and Dowry offences.

What did the court decide?

The criminal petition was disposed of and the proceedings in Crime No. 120/2022 pending against the petitioner were quashed.

Sridhar @ Sreedhara C Vs State by — Dowry and Cruelty | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

CRL.P No. 5125 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5125 OF 2022

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRIDHAR @ SREEDHARA C., S/O CHANNARAJU H.B., AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT NO.126, 3^RD CROSS 4^TH MAIN, KPSC LAYOUT BENGALURU – 560 0560.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI RAJESH RAI., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

STATE BY HALASURU GATE POLICE BENGALURU CITY REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGLAURU – 560 001.

¶13

Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

SMT. RAMYASHREE W/O SRIDHAR AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS R/AT SRI LAKSHMI NILAYA 1^ST CROSS, VIVEKNAGARA

¶15

¶16

CRL.P No. 5125 of 2022

¶17

HASSAN DISTICT - 573 201.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SMT.K.P.YASHODHA, HCGP FOR R1;

¶20

SRI NAIK VENKATESH ISHWAR., ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶21

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 120/2022 DATED 05.05.2022 REGISTERED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT POLICE AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 324, 326, 341, 504, 506 OF IPC R/W SEC 3 AND 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT BASED ON THE COMPLAINT LODGED BY SECOND RESPONDENT AND THE PROCEEDINGS ARISING THERE FROM, PRESENTLY PENDING ON THE FILE OF 1^ST ACMM AT BENGALURU.

¶22

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

¶23

ORDER

¶24

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question proceedings in Crime No.120/2022, pending on the file of the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 326, 341, 504 and 506 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶25

¶26

CRL.P No. 5125 of 2022

¶27

During the pendency of this petition, the parties to the lis have settled the dispute amicably among themselves and file their respective affidavits along with a joint memo before this Court, on such settlement.

¶28

One of the affidavits, filed by the petitioner, insofar as it is germane for consideration of the settlement arrived at between the parties , reads as follows:

¶29

“2.) I state that, I filed the above Criminal Petition to Quash the proceedings in Crime No.120/2022 dated 05/05/2022 pending against me, based on the complaint lodged by Respondent No.2 against me for the offences punishable u/s 324, 326, 341, 504 & 506 of IPC and Sec. 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, presently pending on the file of Hon'ble 1^st ACMM at Bengaluru.

¶30

3.) I state that, presently myself and the 2^nd Respondent and her family members together amicably settled the dispute between us and living together in my house in the above shown address (i.e. the matrimonial house of the 2^nd Respondent) with our child.

¶31

4.) I state that myself and the 2^nd Respondent and her family members

¶32

¶33

CRL.P No. 5125 of 2022

¶34

amicably settled all the disputes and the 2^nd Respondent and her family are agreed to appear before this Hon'ble Court and to pray for quashing the Crime No.120/2022 pending against me in Crime No.120/2022 dated 05/05/2022, pending on the file of 1^st ACMM at Bengaluru against me for the offences punishable u/s 324, 326, 341, 504 & 506 of IPC and Sec. 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, based on the complaint lodged by 2^nd Respondent.

¶35

5.) I state that the compromise arrived between us is without a force, coercion or undue influence either from my side or from 2^nd Respondent side.”

¶36

Though the offence is one punishable under Section 326 of the IPC, as the dispute revolves between the husband and the wife and the same is resolved in terms of the afore-extracted terms of settlement, I deem it appropriate to terminate the proceedings initiated against the petitioner for the afore-quoted offences, as the same are not against the State.

¶37

¶38

CRL.P No. 5125 of 2022

¶39

For the aforesaid reasons, I pass the following:

¶40

ORDER

¶41

(i) The criminal petition is disposed.

¶42

(ii) The proceedings in Crime No.120/2022, pending on the file of the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, stand

¶43

quashed.

¶44

Sd/JUDGE

¶45

NVJ

Sridhar @ Sreedhara C v. State by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sridhar @ Sreedhara C v. State by

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

Mohammed Farooq Ur Rehaman Vs State by Lashkar P.S

S K Prabhu Vs the State of Karnataka

Om Sai Vs State of Karnataka

Mr. Lakshmanan M Vs State of Karnataka

P Ramesh Krishnappa Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Ismail S Vs State of Karnataka