Allowed

Sri Suman Nair v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC2 Nov 2022CRL.P/6605/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Three criminal petitions were filed under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of the complaint and FIR registered against the petitioners in a matrimonial dispute involving the complainant, her husband, in-laws, and paramour. The court quashed the proceedings in CC No.56045/2018 after establishing that the dispute had been amicably resolved with a divorce decree granted.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in CC No.56045/2018 on the file of XXIX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru against petitioners are quashed and set aside.

Sri Suman Nair Vs State of Karnataka — Matrimonial and Divorce | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6605 OF 2016 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7951 OF 2016, & CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7952 OF 2016

¶6

IN CRL.P. NO.6605 OF 2016:

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. SUMAN NAIR D/O. SURESH K. NAIR AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS HAVING HER BUSINESS AT KRISHNAN NAIR AND SONS JEWELERS PADMA VILASOM ROAD, PAZHAVAGADI TRIVANDRAM, THIRUVANATHAPURAM CITY KERALA - 695 023. (BY SMT. UDITA RAMESH, ADVOCATE)

¶9

... PETITIONER

¶10

IN CRL.P. NO.7951 OF 2016:

¶11

BETWEEN:

¶12

1. SRI MURALEEDHARAN

¶13

S/O LATE VELLAKUNNIL KOCHUKUNJUKURUP AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS

¶14

2 . SMT. SANTA MURALEEDHARAN W/O SRI MURALEEDHARAN AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS

¶15

¶16

BOTH ARE R/AT 'MURALIKA' T.C.4/1532, NORTH CLIFF HOUSE ROAD DEVASOM BOARD JUNCTION TRIVANDRAUM - 695 003.

¶17

... PETITIONERS

¶18

(BY MRS. UDITA RAMESH, ADVOCATE)

¶19

IN CRL.P. NO.7952 OF 2016:

¶20

BETWEEN:

¶21

SMT. NISHA MURALEEDHARAN D/O. SRI MURALEEDHARAN AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/At 'MURALIKA', T.C.4/1532 NORTH CLIFF HOUSE ROAD DEVASOM BOARD JUNCTION TRIVANDRAUM - 695 003.

¶22

... PETITIONER

¶23

(BY MRS. UDITA RAMESH, ADVOCATE)

¶24

AND:

¶25

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY H.A.L. POLICE STATION BANGALORE - 560 037.

¶26

SREEJA SHOBA PILLAI W/O ANISH MURALIDHARAN FLAT NO.102, 1ST CROSS 5TH MAIN, JAGADISHNAGAR NEAR BEML HOSPITAL, G.M. PALYA BANGALORE - 560 075.

¶27

... RESPONDENTS

¶28

(COMMON) (BY SRI K. RAHUL RAI, HCGP FOR R.1;

¶29

SMT. PRAMILA NESARGI, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR

¶30

¶31

SRI HEMANTH KUMAR D., ADVOCATE FOR R.2)

¶32

THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT AND FIR FILED BEFORE THE X A.C.M.M. COURT, BANGALORE IN CR.NO.207/2016 PENDING BEFORE THE H.A.L. P.S., BANGALORE (ANNEXURES-A AND B) FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES P/U/S 3 AND 4 OF D.P. ACT AND SECTIONS 498-A, 504, 506 AND 420 R/W 34 OF IPC IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED.

¶33

THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS COMING ON FOR REPORTING SETTLEMENT, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶34

O R D E R

¶35

All the above cases have arisen out of matrimonial dispute between respondent no.2 and her husband. Petitioners in Crl.P.No.7951/2016 are father-in-law and mother-in-law of respondent no.2, the petitioner in Crl.P.No.7952/2016 is sister-in-law of respondent no.2 and the petitioner in Crl.P.No.6605/2016 is said to be paramour of the husband of respondent no.2. On the complaint lodged by respondent no.2, Crime No.207/2016 was registered by HAL Police which culminated into CC No.56045/2018 on the file of XXIX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, wherein all the petitioners herein are the accused. It is submitted by the

¶36

¶37

learned counsel for the parties that presently respondent no.2 and her husband have resolved the matter amicably and respondent no.2 has agreed to withdraw all the cases filed against her husband as well as his relatives and paramour. It is further submitted that based on the said agreement arrived at by the parties, a decree of divorce has also been granted dissolving the marriage of respondent no.2 and her husband. The parties pray that the proceedings in Crime No.207/2016 which has culminated into CC No.56045/2018 be quashed. The learned counsel for the petitioners as well as respondent no.2 have filed a memo dated 02.11.2022 in this regard.

¶38

Memo is taken on record.

¶39

The dispute in CC No.56045/2018 essentially pertains

¶40

to matrimonial dispute between respondent no.2 and her husband. The parties have arrived at a compromise as aforementioned. Quashing the proceedings will only help the parties to lead their lives peacefully without enmity. The offences alleged do not constitute any heinous crimes

¶41

¶42

or shocks the conscience of the Society. Hence, the following:

¶43

ORDER

¶44

The proceedings in CC No.56045/2018 on the file of XXIX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, against the petitioners herein is quashed and set aside.

¶45

Criminal Petitions are allowed accordingly.

¶46

SD/JUDGE

¶47

hkh.

Sri Suman Nair v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Suman Nair 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Narayanaswamy Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Thimakka Vs the State of Karnataka

Suresh Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Gangappa N Vs State of Karnataka

Mrs. Seema Bhutada Vs Mr. Suresh Sikchi

Mrs Indira K Devadas Vs State of Karnataka