Allowed

Smt. Prathibha P. Kulkarni v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC11 Aug 2023CRL.P/1114/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Coordinated criminal petitions filed by a petitioner to quash criminal and civil proceedings involving her family. The parties settled amicably, dissolving a cohabitation relationship. The court quashed the criminal and civil proceedings as a settlement was reached, deeming further trial an abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

Quashed criminal proceedings in C.C.No.34732/2021 and Crl.P.C. No.283/2022 regarding Sections 498-A/506 IPC and Dowry Act.

Smt. Prathibha P. Kulkarni Vs the State of Karnataka — Domestic Violence | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

NC: 2023:KHC:28660 CRL.P No. 1114 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 4464 of 2022 CRL.P No. 9643 of 2022

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1114 OF 2022 C/W

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4464 OF 2022 CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9643 OF 2022

¶9

IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1114 OF 2022:

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

SMT. PRATHIBHA P. KULKARNI W/O LATE SRI PRAKASH D. KULKARNI AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.164, 5TH MAIN, 2ND STAGE, 2ND PHASE, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM BANGALORE-560086.

¶12

…PETITIONER

¶13

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

¶14

(BY SRI. VENKATESH S ARBATTI, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, BASAVANAGUDI WOMEN'S POLICE STATION, BANGALORE AND ANOTHER REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE-560001.

¶16

SMT. SARAYU H W/O PAVAN P. KULKARNI AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT

¶17

NC: 2023:KHC:28660 CRL.P No. 1114 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 4464 of 2022 CRL.P No. 9643 of 2022

¶18

¶19

NO.7, BANASHREE 4TH CROSS, A AND B BLOCK RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR MYSURU CITY-570022, KARNATAKA.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. THEJESH P., HCGP FOR R1/STATE; SRI NITIN RAMESH, ADVOCATE A/W SRI B. SIDDESHWARA, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

¶22

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET (ANNEXURE-A) COMPLAINT DATED 25.08.2021 (ANNEXURE-B) FIR IN CRIME NO.134/2021 (ANNEXURE-C), ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.34732/2021 (ANNEXURE-E) IN C.C.NO.34732/2021 REGISTERED WITH BASAVANAGUDI WOMEN POLICE STATION, BENGALURU, UNDER SECTION 498-A, 506 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC, 1860 AND SECTION 3 AND 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT IN RELATION TO THE PETITIONER REGISTERED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 ON THE FILE OF THE XXXVII ADDITIONAL CHIEF MAGISTRATE BENGALURU.

¶23

IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4464 OF 2022:

¶24

BETWEEN:

¶25

SMT. PRATHIBHA P KULKARNI W/O LATE SRI. PRAKASH D KULKARNI AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS R/AT NO.164, 5TH MAIN 2ND STAGE, 2ND PHASE, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM BENGALURU-560086.

¶26

…PETITIONER

¶27

(BY SRI. VENKATESH S ARBATTI, ADVOCATE)

¶28

AND:

¶29

SMT. SARAYU H W/O PAVAN P KULKARNI AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS PRESENTLY R/AT NO.7 BANSHREE 4TH CROSS, A AND B BLOCK

¶30

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:28660 CRL.P No. 1114 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 4464 of 2022 CRL.P No. 9643 of 2022

¶31

RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR

¶32

MYSURU CITY-570 022, KARNATAKA.

¶33

SRI. PAVAN P KULKARNI S/O LATE SRI. PRAKASH D KULKARNI AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/AT NO.164, 5TH MAIN 2ND STAGE, 2ND PHASE, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM BENGALURU-560086.

¶34

…RESPONDENTS

¶35

(BY SRI. NITIN RAMESH, ADVOCATE FOR R-1; R-2 SERVED)

¶36

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN I ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MYSORE IN CRL.MISC.NO.283/2022 FILED BY THE 1st RESPONDENT THE ORDER DATED 19.03.2022 ISSUING SUMMONS, AND THIS PETITION FILED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE D.V ACT.

¶37

IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9643 OF 2022:

¶38

BETWEEN:

¶39

SRI. PAVAN P KULKARNI S/O LATE SRI PRAKASH D KULKARNI AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/AT NO.164, 5TH MAIN, 2ND STAGE 2ND PHASE, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM BANGALORE-560086.

¶40

…PETITIONER

¶41

(BY SRI. VENKATESH S ARBATTI, ADVOCATE)

¶42

AND:

¶43

SMT. SARAYU H W/O PAVAN P KULKARNI AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS PRESENTLY R/AT NO.7, BANASHREE 4TH CROSS

¶44

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:28660 CRL.P No. 1114 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 4464 of 2022 CRL.P No. 9643 of 2022

¶45

A AND B BLOCK RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR

¶46

MYSURU CITY-570 022, KARNATAKA

¶47

…RESPONDENT

¶48

(BY SRI. B. SIDDESWARA, ADVOCATE)

¶49

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CRL.MISC.NO.699/2022 PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT, MYSORE.

¶50

THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR REPORTING SETTLEMENT, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶51

ORDER

¶52

Since the issue involved in these petitions are similar in nature, hence, they are taken up together, heard and disposed of by the common order.

¶53

IN CRL.P.No.1114/2022:

¶54

The petitioner accused No.1 is sought to be prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC and Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶55

IN CRL.P.No.4464/2022:

¶56

This petition is filed challenging the proceedings initiated under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 by the petitioner, against the husband and mother-in-law of the respondent No.1.

¶57

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:28660 CRL.P No. 1114 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 4464 of 2022 CRL.P No. 9643 of 2022

¶58

IN CRL.P.No.9643/2022

¶59

This petition is filed challenging the proceedings initiated by the respondent No.2-complainant under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. claiming maintenance from the petitioner herein.

¶60

The parties are present before this Court and they have filed a joint memo, stating that, the parties have amicably settled the dispute among themselves and in terms of the settlement, marriage of the respondent No.2 with the Pavan P. Kulkarni, son of the petitioner in Crl.P.No.1114/2022 has been dissolved mutually and permanent alimony of Rs.11,00,000/- is paid through Demand Draft to the respondent No.2-defectocomplainant.

¶61

The respondent No.2-defacto complainant has no objection for quashing the impugned proceedings for the offences alleged against the petitioners and also proceedings initiated under Section 125 of Cr.P.C.

¶62

The joint memo is placed on record.

¶63

Though the offences alleged against the petitioners are cognizable and non-compoundable, however, having regard to the fact that, the defacto-complainant has no objection for quashing the impugned proceedings, it would be a futile exercise, if the accused Nos.1 and 2 are subjected to trial, since

¶64

6 - NC: 2023:KHC:28660 CRL.P No. 1114 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 4464 of 2022 CRL.P No. 9643 of 2022

¶65

the probability of their conviction is remote and bleak in view of the settlement arrived between the parties. Hence, the continuation of the criminal proceedings will be an abuse of process of law.

¶66

9. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶67

ORDER

¶68

i) The criminal petitions are allowed;

¶69

ii) The impugned proceedings in C.C.No.34732/2021, on the file of the XXXVII Additional Chief Magistrate, Bangalore, insofar it relates to petitioner-accused No.2 in Crl.P.No.1114/2022, is hereby quashed.

¶70

iii) The impugned proceedings in Crl.Misc.No.283/2022 pending on the file of the I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Mysore District, Mysore, in Crl.P No.4464/2022, is hereby quashed.

¶71

iv) The impugned proceedings in Crl.Misc.No.699/2022 pending on the file of the II Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Mysore District, Mysore, insofar as it relates to the petitioner herein in Crl.P No.9643/2022, is quashed.

¶72

Sd/JUDGE

¶73

¶74

7 - NC: 2023:KHC:28660 CRL.P No. 1114 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 4464 of 2022 CRL.P No. 9643 of 2022

¶75

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶76

[SMT. PRATHIBHA P. KULKARNI VS. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER]

¶77

HCJ

¶78

03.06.2024

¶79

(VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL HEARING)

¶80

ORDER ON ‘FOR BEING SPOKEN TO’

¶81

It is stated that in criminal petition Nos.1114/2022 c/w 4464/2022, 9643/2022 disposed of on 11.08.2023 in page No.6 in the operative portion (ii) of the order the words ‘petitioner-accused No.2’ has been mentioned in place of ‘petitioners’. Accordingly, in operative portion (ii) of the order the word ‘petitioner-accused No.2’ to be replaced by the word ‘petitioners’.

¶82

This order shall be read in conjunction with the order dated 11.08.2023 passed in criminal petition Nos.1114/2022 c/w 4464/2022, 9643/2022.

¶83

Sd/JUDGE

¶84

HB/-

¶85

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1

Smt. Prathibha P. Kulkarni v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Prathibha P. Kulkarni 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sharath @ Sharath Vs the State of Karnataka

Naveen N S Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Mahesh Gopalkrishna Shetty Vs Union of India

Mr Jai Kumar N. Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Pradeep Eshwar Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Raviprasad Cavale @ Raviprasad Kavle Vs Sri Anup Kavale