Petitioners challenged prosecution for Dowry Harassment offences. Court allowed petition quashing proceedings due to mutual consent divorce and settlement wherein wife received maintenance and agreed to cooperate in quashing.
Petition allowed. Prosecution in C.C. No.17057/2019 for offences under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 IPC 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 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6611 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
(BY SRI. PRAVEEN C.P, ADVOCATE)
AND:
NC: 2023:KHC:39436 CRL.P No. 6611 of 2020
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. WAHEEDA M.M, HCGP FOR R1)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.17057/2019 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A, 323, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE IX A.C.M.M., AT BENGALURU.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioners have challenged the prosecution
initiated against them in CC No.17057/2019 pending Trial before the IX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Section 498(A), 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC.
No.1 submitted information to respondent No.1 on 15.05.2019 about commission of cognizable offence by the
NC: 2023:KHC:39436 CRL.P No. 6611 of 2020
petitioners. She claimed that she was physically and mentally harassed by the petitioners.
learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that a petition for dissolution of marriage for mutual consent was filed in MC No.2952/2019 and the parties have dissolved their marriage. He submits that as a part of the settlement, respondent No.2 received a sum of Rs.10,01,500/- towards claims of maintenance, permanent alimony and full and final settlement of all claims against the petitioners. He also contends that respondent No.2 had agreed to co-operate in quashing the proceedings in CC No.17057/2019. A copy of the settlement entered into between the petitioners and respondent No.2 is placed on record.
NC: 2023:KHC:39436 CRL.P No. 6611 of 2020
punishable under Section 498(A), 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC is hereby quashed.
Sd/JUDGE
KBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32 CT: BHK
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings for offences under Sections 498A and 323 IPC should be quashed in view of the dissolution of marriage and settlement.
Whether the settlement between the petitioners and the wife warrants quashing of the criminal proceedings.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
BALACHANDRA K.G
GOVINDAPPA K.C
SMT. LALITHA
STATE OF KARNATKA
SMT. SHOBHA RANI S.S
R. NATARAJ
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
