Disposed

Harshavardhan Singh v. Sheetal Rajput

Karnataka HC15 Jun 2022CRL.P/7010/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka disposed of two criminal petitions filed under Section 482 CrPC. Upon confirmation that the parties had arrived at a settlement regarding matrimonial and domestic violence allegations, the Court quashed the pending proceedings in the connected criminal cases. This order is founded on the absence of allegations against the State and the existence of a settlement agreemen

What did the court decide?

Criminal Petitions disposed; Proceedings in C.C.No.11782/2020 and Crl.Misc.No.67/2020 quashed.

Harshavardhan Singh Vs Sheetal Rajput — Matrimonial and Divorce | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE, 15^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7010 OF 2020

¶7

C/W

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.323 OF 2021

¶9

IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7010 OF 2020

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

HARSHAVARDHAN SINGH, S/O PRATAP SINGH, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, NO.2/55, C-6, DEVI TRADERS, DEVI NILAYA, KOVIL STREET, KRISHNAGIRI 635 001, TAMIL NADU.

¶12

PRATAP SINGH, S/O LATE RAM SINGH, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, NO.2/55, C-6, DEVI TRADERS DEVI NILAYA, KOVIL STREET, KRISHNAGIRI 635 001, TAMIL NADU.

¶13

SUMITHRA, W/O PRATAP SINGH, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, NO.2/55, C-6, DEVI TRADERS DEVI NILAYA, KOVIL STREET

¶14

¶15

KRISHNAGIRI 635 001 TAMIL NADU.

¶16

DEEPA SINGH, W/O JAYPAL SINGH, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.28, 4^TH BLOCK, KALAPPA LAYOUT, DODDABOMMASANDRA, VIDYARANYAPURA, BENGALURU – 560 097.

¶17

RAMYA, W/O KARTHIK, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, RESIDING AT: NO.1525, LANGAYATHA STREET, BERIGAI, SHOLAGIRI TALUK, KRISHNAGIRI TALUK – 635 005 TAMILNADU.

¶18

... PETITIONERS

¶19

(BY SRI S.G. BHAGAVAN, ADVOCATE)

¶20

AND:

¶21

SHEETAL RAJPUT, D/O. SUDARSHAN SINGH, NO.50, FIRST FLOOR, 8^TH CROSS, UAS LAYOUT, SANJAYNAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 094.

¶22

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BASAVANAGUDI WOMEN POLICE STATION, JAYANAGAR SUB-DIVISION BENGALURU CITY – 560 070

¶23

SMT. HEMALATHA R., MAJOR, POLICE INSPECTOR,

¶24

¶25

WOMEN’S POLICE STATION, BASAVANAGUDI, WEST ZONE, BENGALURU – 560 070

¶26

... RESPONDENTS

¶27

(BY SMT. K. P. YASHODHA, HCGP FOR R2; SRI. G. DESU REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R3 - SERVED)

¶28

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.11782/2020 PENDING IN THE COURT OF THE 37TH ACMM, BANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A, 506 OF IPC AND SEC.3, 4 OF D.P ACT.

¶29

IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.323 OF 2021

¶30

BETWEEN:

¶31

P. HARSHAVARDHAN SINGH, S/O. R. PRATAP SINGH, AGED 33 YEARS.

¶32

R. PRATAP SINGH, S/O. LATE RAM SINGH, AGED 67 YEARS

¶33

MRS. SUMITHRA, W/O R. PRATAP SINGH, AGED 57 YEARS,

¶34

ALL RESIDING AT: “DEVI NILAYA”. 2/55-C6, KOVIL STREET, BERIGAL – 635 001 (KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT - TAMIL NADU).

¶35

MRS. DEEPA SINGH, W/O SRI JAYAPAL SINGH,

¶36

¶37

AGED 38 YEARS, NO.28, 4^TH BLOCK, KALAPPA LAYOUT, DODDABOMMASANDRA, VIDYARANYAPURA, BENGALURU – 560 097.

¶38

MRS. RAMYA, W/O SRI KARTHIK, AGED 29 YEARS, NO.1525, LINGAYATHA STREET, BERIGAI – 635 005.

¶39

... PETITIONERS

¶40

(BY SRI. S.G. BHAGAVAN, ADVOCATE)

¶41

AND:

¶42

MRS. SHEETAL RAJPUT, AGED 28 YEARS, NO.46, 6^TH CROSS, CENTRAL EXCISE LAYOUT, SANJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 094.

¶43

... RESPONDENT

¶44

(BY SRI. G. DESU REDDY, ADVOCATE)

¶45

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CRL.MISC.NO.67/2020 PENDING ON THE COURT OF THE II-MMTCII BANGALORE, FILED U/S 12 OF PROTECTION OF WOMEN FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT.

¶46

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

¶47

ORDER

¶48

Criminal Petition No.7010/2020 calls in question the

¶49

proceedings initiated in C.C.No.11782/2020, pending on the file of the 37^th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru,

¶50

¶51

for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 506 of IPC

¶52

and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, whereas, Criminal Petition No.323/2021 calls into question the proceedings in Crl.Misc.No.67/2020, pending on the file of MMTC – II, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

¶53

It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for both the parties that during the pendency of these petitions, the parties to the lis have arrived at settlement and have filed memorandum of settlement before this Court in Crl.P.No.7010/2020, along with the decree dated 29.03.2022 drawn in M.C.No.2156/2021, by the IV Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru.

¶54

The memorandum of settlement reads as follows:

¶55

“MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT UNDER SECTION 89 OF CPC READ WITH RULES 24 AND 25 OF THE KARNATAKA CIVIL PROCEDURE (MEDIATION) RULES, 2005.

¶56

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

¶57

¶58

7. In view of this settlement agreement, the parties hereby agreed to appear before the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru in Crl. P. No. 323/2021 and Crl. P. No. 7010/2020 arising out of Crl. Misc. No. 67/2020 pending on the file of MMTC-lI, Bengaluru and in C.C. No. 11782/2020 pending before the 37^th ACMM, Bengaluru respectively and to cooperate with each other for closure of the above mentioned petitions.

¶59

8. The petitioner has agreed to pay a sum of Rs. 11,00,000/- (Rupees Eleven Lakhs Only) to the respondent towards all her claims of maintenance/ permanent alimony as full and final settlement by way of D.D.No. 263073 dated 17.03.2022 drawn on Indian Bank, Berigai Branch, Krishnagiri Distirict, Tamilnadu and the same will be handed over to the respondent before the Hon’ble Court at the time of reporting settlement.

¶60

9. The respondent has agreed to bear entire educational other incidental expenses of the minor son without any further demand of money from the petitioner.”

¶61

In the light of the settlement arrived at between the parties, acceptance for closure of the cases between them and as the allegations are not against the State, I deem it appropriate to obliterate the proceedings pending in C.C.No.11782/2020 and Crl.Misc.No.67/2020.

¶62

¶63

For the aforesaid reasons, I pass the following:

¶64

ORDER

¶65

(i) The criminal petitions are disposed.

¶66

(ii) The proceedings in C.C.No.11782/2020, pending on the file of the 37^th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru and Crl.Misc.No.67/2020, pending on the file of MMTC – II, Bengaluru, against the petitioners, stand quashed.

¶67

Sd/JUDGE

¶68

nvj CT:MJ

Harshavardhan Singh v. Sheetal Rajput

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harshavardhan Singh v. Sheetal Rajput

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Vs Harish H

Panchaksharaiah T B Vs State of Karnataka

Sanjay Vs R Arun Kumar

P Harshavardhan Singh Vs Mrs. Sheetal Rajput

Swamy @ Srinivasa Vs the Range Forest Officer

Sri Shakthivelu Vs State of Karnataka