The Karnataka High Court quashed criminal proceedings under Section 498-A IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act after the parties to the underlying family dispute settled their differences and obtained a divorce decree by mutual agreement without maintenance claims.
Criminal petition disposed of; proceedings in C.C. No. 2377/2020 quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JUNE, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 523 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
S/O LATE B.K. GURUVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS.
ALL ARE R/O SHRAVANI NILAYA, 4TH CROSS, ANDANAPPA LAYOUT, SOMPURA HOBLI, DOBASPET, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL - 562 111.
4TH CROSS, ANDANAPPA LAYOUT, SOUMPURA HOBLI, DOBASPET,
NC: 2023:KHC:21697 CRL.P No. 523 of 2023
NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL - 562 111.
R/AT SHRAVANI NILAYA, 4TH CROSS, ANDANAPPA LAYOUT, SOUMPURA HOBLI, DOBASPET, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL - 562 111.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. B.R. DEEPAK, ADVOCATE)
AND:
NC: 2023:KHC:21697 CRL.P No. 523 of 2023
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. VIVEKANANDA S., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C BY
THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 POLICE IN C.C.NO.2377/2020 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S.498-A R/W SEC.149 OF IPC R/W SEC.3,4 OF DP ACT 1961 WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT NELAMANGALA BENGALURU RURAL AND TO EXONERATE THE PETITIONER FROM THE ABOVE CASE AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR REPORTING SETTLEMENT, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
NC: 2023:KHC:21697 CRL.P No. 523 of 2023
ORDER
The petition calls in question the proceedings in C.C.No.2377/2020, registered for offences punishable under Sections 498A read with Section 149 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
"The petitioner has filed the petition under Section 13(i)(a) of Hindu Marriage Act seeking Decree of Divorce to dissolve the marriage solemnized with respondent on 12.05.2017.
After service of notice the respondent appeared through his advocate and accordingly, case was referred to mediation wherein both parties have agreed to dissolve the marriage and have filed memorandum of agreement dated 07.02.2023 signed by both parties and their advocates and also by mediator wherein they have agreed to end their relationship by decree of divorce and also they have
NC: 2023:KHC:21697 CRL.P No. 523 of 2023
agreed that they do not have any claim of maintenance or alimony towards each other.
Further as per judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High court in WP No. 18848/2016 (GM-FC) between Aravind Kumar V/s. Smt. Shital Verma , wherein, it is held:
"9. In the present facts, when the Memorandum has been entered into in the Mediation and when the petition is taken up before this Court, both the parties stand by the agreement, there is no reason to discard such agreement though it is entered into a petition under Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib) and the consideration for dissolution of marriage is being made by the agreement of the parties. At best the Court can look into the terms agreed in the settlement to take note as to whether any of the terms is illegal, unconscionable or opposed to public policy. If that test is satisfied and the parties confirm the terms of settlement, the same is required to be accepted and the proceedings be terminated in terms of the settlement".
and as per the above ratio in this case also the petitioner and respondent have
agreed to dissolve their marriage by decree of divorce before mediator and also both have agreed that they do not have any claim against each other and the same is signed by both parties and their respective advocates and in view of same. I proceed to pass the following;
ORDER
The memorandum of settlement dated 07.02.2023 is hereby accepted.
Office is directed to draw Decree accordingly and report of Mediator shall be part and parcel of Decree.
No order as to costs."
the parties and the offences being punishable under Section 498A of IPC and that of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 not being against the State, I deem it appropriate to accept the settlement and terminate the proceedings against the petitioners.
NC: 2023:KHC:21697 CRL.P No. 523 of 2023
file of the Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Nelamangala stand
quashed.
Sd/JUDGE
SMJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 100
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings in the matrimonial dispute should be terminated upon settlement of the family court case.
Whether the offences under Section 498-A IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act are compoundable and against the State.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Aravind Kumar v. Smt. Shital VermaRelied on¶44
WP No. 18848/2016 (GM-FC) between Aravind Kumar V/s. Smt. Shital Verma
5 provisions across 3 enactments
Dr. Chandrashekhar B.G. and others
State of Karnataka
Dr. Pavithra L.
M. Nagarprashanna
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
