Allowed

Pradyumna S v. State by Mico Layout

Karnataka HC21 Sept 2023CRL.P/6539/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a criminal petition filed under Section 482 CrPC to quash proceedings under the Dowry Prohibition Act and IPC 498A. The court allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings due to an amicable settlement and mutual divorce between the parties, deeming further trial an abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Petition is allowed and the impugned proceedings in C.C. No.8914/2023 stand quashed.

Pradyumna S Vs State by Mico Layout — Dowry and Cruelty | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:34303 CRL.P No. 6539 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023 BEFORE

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶4

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6539 OF 2023

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

PRADYUMNA S S/O DR.SATISH, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS.

¶7

SHAILAJA B R W/O DR.SATISH V, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/AT NO.43, SRI AMBIKA NILAYA, 1ST C MAIN, 7TH CROSS, BTM II STAGE, BANGALORE-560 076.

¶8

…PETITIONERS

¶9

(BY SRI. MAYUR M, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. MRC MANOHAR, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

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

¶12

STATE BY MICO LAYOUT POLICE STATION, BANGALORE, REP BY SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶13

SMT PRATHEEKSHA P GOWDA W/O PRADYUMNA S, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/AT NO.43, SRI AMBIKA NILAYA, 1ST C MAIN, 7TH CROSS, BTM II STAGE, BANGALORE-560 076.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. WAHEEDA M M, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. TEJAS H, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.8914/2023 (CRIME NO.278/2022) REGISTERED BY MICO LAYOUT P.S., FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A

¶16

¶17

NC: 2023:KHC:34303 CRL.P No. 6539 of 2023

¶18

OF IPC PENDING BEFORE VI A.C.M.M, BENGALURU AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS OF LAW.

¶19

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

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Petitioners-accused are sought to be prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and Sections 34 and 498A of IPC.

¶22

The case of the prosecution is that, accused No.1 husband, accused No.2 mother-in-law subjected the defactocomplainant to cruelty, both mentally and physically, and also a demand was made to bring money from the parental home.

¶23

The parties are present before this Court and they have filed an application under Section 320(2) r/w 482 of Cr.P.C., for compounding of the offences, stating that petitioner No.1 and defacto complainant had filed mutual consent divorce petition in M.C.No.4809/2023 for dissolving their marriage, and in terms of the settlement their marriage has been dissolved and the defacto complainant has no objections for quashing the impugned proceedings.

¶24

The said application is taken on record.

¶25

Though the offences alleged against the petitioners are cognizable and non-compoundable, however, having regard to the fact that, the parties have amicably resolved the dispute among themselves, and the defacto complainant having no

¶26

¶27

NC: 2023:KHC:34303 CRL.P No. 6539 of 2023

¶28

objections for quashing the impugned proceedings, it would be a futile exercise, if the petitioners accused are subjected to trial, since the probability of their conviction is remote and bleak, in view of the settlement. Therefore, the continuation of the criminal proceedings will be an abuse of process of law.

¶29

Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶30

ORDER

¶31

i) The Criminal Petition is allowed;

¶32

ii) The impugned proceedings in C.C. No.8914/2023, pending on the file of the VI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, stands quashed

¶33

Sd/JUDGE

¶34

Pradyumna S v. State by Mico Layout

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradyumna S v. State by Mico Layout

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 Narayan Mahadevrao Biradar Vs M/S Aarbee International

Sri. Abdul Majeed Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Premsingh Choudary Vs State of Karnataka

Dr Sudhakara G Vs State of Karnataka by

Mr Kuber Das Vs State of Karnataka

Shri B G Prakash Kumar Vs the State Represented by the