Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. sought quashing of proceedings in S.C.No.10036/2022 for offences under Sections 498A and 313 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act after divorce and amicable settlement between the parties. The Court accepted the joint memo and affidavit and quashed the proceedings.
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.
NC: 2024:KHC:32072 CRL.P No. 1803 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1803 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI M.N.MADHUSUDHAN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
AND NOW R/AT KOWDLY VILLAGE KOPPA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT PIN CODE – 571 428.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. SOWMYA R., HCGP FOR R1; SRI LOKESHA D. K., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF THE CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS ALONG WITH CHARGE SHEET FILED IN S.C.NO.10036/2022 BY THE FIRST
RESPONDENT POLICE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498-A, 313 OF IPC AND SEC.3, 4 OF DP ACT NOW PENDING BEFORE THE V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, TUMAKURU (SITTING AT TIPTUR).
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
ORAL ORDER
The petitioners – husband and his family members are before this Court calling in question proceedings in S.C.No.10036/2022, pending before the V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru (Sitting at Tiptur), for the offences under Sections 498A and 313 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
NC: 2024:KHC:32072 CRL.P No. 1803 of 2024
also their submission that during the pendency of this petition, the parties have settled the dispute amicably among themselves and respondent No.2 on her own will has agreed to withdraw the impugned proceedings. An application under Section 320(2) of the Cr.P.C. along with joint memo and an affidavit is filed before this Court to that effect.
No.2 reads as follows:
“….
3. Further as per the Examination of RW1 the second respondent has agreed to withdraw / quashing the said Criminal Case. Under these circumstances the petitioners prefer this criminal petition for quashing the FIR, Complaint & charge sheet & entire proceedings in SC No.10036/2022 on the file of V Additional District & Sessions Court at Tumkur sitting at Tiptur as per Annexure – F.
4. IN view of the settlement arrived at, the complainant / respondent No.2 has no wish to continue the criminal proceedings initiated by her and she has given up all the allegations no.2 has no objection for quashing the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioners.
5. The petitioners and the complainant / respondent no.2 have understood the contents of the joint memo and out of their free will, volition and without any fear, force, threat or coercion, have affixed their signature to this joint memo.”
NC: 2024:KHC:32072 CRL.P No. 1803 of 2024
In the light of the fact that the parties have already parted their
ways and arrived at settlement and as it is a marital dispute, I deem it appropriate to accept the application, joint memo and
the affidavit and terminate the proceedings against the petitioners, as the allegations are not against the State.
ORDER
I.A.No.1/2024 is also disposed, as a consequence.
Sd/(M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE
NVJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 64 CT:SS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings for Sections 498A and 313 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act should be quashed following an amicable settlement and divorce between the parties.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Sri Santhosh S.N.
Sri Narayana Shetty
Smt. Anasuya
State of Karnataka by Dandinashivara Police Station
Smt. Nisarga K.C. @ Lavanya K.C.
M. Nagaprasanna
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
