Allowed

Sri. S. Dhananjay v. State by Karnataka

Karnataka HC23 Nov 2023CRL.P/1770/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal petition filed under Section 482 CrPC for quashing proceedings under IPC Sections 498A, 323, and 504, the court quashed the proceedings after finding that the parties had amicably resolved their dispute via a settlement involving mutual divorce and financial compensation, rendering further trial an abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

Criminal petition allowed; impugned proceedings in CC No.583/2019 quashed insofar as they relate to the petitioner.

Sri. S. Dhananjay Vs State by Karnataka — Matrimonial and Divorce | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:42344 CRL.P No. 1770 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023 BEFORE

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶4

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1770 OF 2023

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

SRI. S. DHANANJAY S/O LATE D M SIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT NO 247, KAGGALIPURA B BLOCK KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD BANGALORE 560 082.

¶7

…PETITIONER

¶8

(BY SMT. RAJESHWARI M, ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

STATE BY KARNATAKA

¶11

BY KAGGALIPURA POLICE STATION REP. BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE.

¶12

SMT SHILPASHREE M D/O H A MARIYAIAH ALIS MARIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS

¶13

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

¶14

PRESENTLY R/AT NO 59, SHIVA NILAYA 2ND MAIN ROAD, OPP TO GARDEN SCHOOL VITTAL NAGAR, BANGALORE 560 026.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI. VENKATSATYANARAYAN A, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. H RAJANNA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN CR.NO.236/2018 IN C.C.NO.583/2019 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE II ACJM, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE, THE OFENCES P/U/S 498A, 323 AND 504 OF IPC AND ETC.

¶18

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

¶19

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:42344 CRL.P No. 1770 of 2023

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice for the respondent No.1.

¶22

Sri H Rajanna, learned counsel files power on behalf of the respondent No.2.

¶23

The petitioner is sought to be prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504 of IPC, alleging that the petitioner - husband subjected the defacto complainant to cruelty both mentally and physically and also assaulted and abused her.

¶24

The parties are present before this court and have filed a joint memo along with an affidavit stating that they have amicably resolved the dispute among themselves before the learned V Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, in MC No.6603/2022 and in terms of the settlement, their marriage has been dissolved mutually, and a sum of Rs.25 lakh is paid to the defacto complainant towards permanent alimony. The respondent No.2 has agreed to withdraw all the allegations made against the petitioner and has no objection for quashing the impugned proceeding.

¶25

The joint memo along with an affidavit are placed

¶26

on record.

¶27

Though the offences alleged against the petitioner are cognizable and non-compoundable, however, having regard

¶28

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:42344 CRL.P No. 1770 of 2023

¶29

to the fact that the parties have amicably resolved their dispute among themselves, and the respondent No.2 having no objections for quashing the impugned criminal proceeding, it would be a futile exercise if the petitioner - accused is subjected to trial, since the probability of his conviction is remote and bleak. Therefore, the continuation of the criminal proceeding will be an abuse of the process of law. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶30

ORDER

¶31

i) Criminal petition is allowed. ii) The impugned proceeding in CC No.583/2019 pending on the file of the learned II Additional CJM Court, Bengaluru Rural District, insofar as it relates to the petitioner herein, is hereby quashed.

¶32

Sd/JUDGE

¶33

BKM

Sri. S. Dhananjay v. State by Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. S. Dhananjay v. State by 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

Raghuraj @ Raghu Vs State of Karnataka

Manjunatha @ Anali Manja Vs State of Karnataka

Edward Makri Desouza Vs the State of Karnataka

Suprith Cheema Parit @ Supreet Kaur Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Ramya G C Gowda Vs State by Sadashivanagar Police

Sri R Manjunatha Vs State of Karnataka