Disposed

Kapil Goutham Halwale v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC24 Sept 2024CRL.P/2065/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Husband and his relatives sought quashing of proceedings for offences including 498A IPC arising from wife's complaint. During pendency, the parties settled by reunion; the wife filed an affidavit consenting to compounding and quashing. The High Court accepted the settlement and quashed the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in C.C.No.52090/2021 (Crime No.306/2020) of K.R. Puram Police Station pending before X ACMM Bengaluru were quashed against all petitioners.

Kapil Goutham Halwale Vs the State of Karnataka — Dowry and Cruelty | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:41228 CRL.P No. 2065 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2065 OF 2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

KAPIL GOUTHAM HALWALE, S/O GOUTHAM HALWALE, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,

¶8

GOUTHAM HALWALE, S/O HALWALE POCHIRAM, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,

¶9

SUSHEELA, W/O GOUTHAM HALWALE, AGE 61 YEARS,

¶10

PRAJNA, W/O NARENDRA,

¶11

Digitally signed by KAVYA G Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,

¶13

PALLAVI MILIND KAMBLE, W/O MILIND KAMBLE, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING AT VENKADRI FLAT, FLAT NO.41, A BLOCK, 4^TH FLOOR, SEGEHALLI, K.R.PURAM, BENGALURU – 560 036. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. N. SREENIVASA MURTHY., ADVOCATE)

¶14

¶15

NC: 2024:KHC:41228 CRL.P No. 2065 of 2024

¶16

AND:

¶17

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, K.R.PURAM POLICE STATION, BENGALURU. REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING COMPLEX, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶18

POOJA KAPIL HALAVALE, W/O KAPIL GOUTHAM HALAVALE, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.80, 2^ND FLOOR, ANUGRAHA LAYOUT, 5^TH CROSS, 1^ST MAIN, KODIGEHALLI ROAD, CRISTAL SITRAIN APARTMENT, K.R.PURAM, BENGALURU – 560 036.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SMT.SOWMYA R., HCGP FOR R1; SRI.N.SURYANARAYANA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶21

THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PETITION AND QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.52090/2021 (IS ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.306/2020) OF K.R.PURAM POLICE STATION FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S.323, 354, 498-A, 504, 506 R/W SEC.149 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE X ACMM AT BENGALURU.

¶22

¶23

NC: 2024:KHC:41228 CRL.P No. 2065 of 2024

¶24

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

The petitioners are before this Court calling in question proceedings in C.C.No.52090/2021 in Crime No.306/2020 of K.R. Puram Police Station, Bengaluru for offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 354, 504 and 506 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as IPC for short) pending on the file of the X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.

¶28

Heard the learned counsel Sri. N. Sreenivasa

¶29

Murthy appearing for the petitioners, Smt. Sowmya R. learned HCGP appearing for respondent No.1 and learned counsel Sri. N. Suryanarayana appearing for respondent No.2.

¶30

¶31

NC: 2024:KHC:41228 CRL.P No. 2065 of 2024

¶32

Learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶33

counsel for respondent No.2 submit that during the pendency of petition the parties to the lis have settled the dispute amongst themselves by reunion. The affidavit reads as follows:

¶34

I Mrs. Pooja Kapil Halavale, W/o Kapil Goutham Halavale, Aged about 29 years, R/at No. 80, 2nd Floor, Anugraha Layout, 5th Cross, 1st Main, Kodigehalli Road, Cristal Sitrain Apartment, K.R. Puram, Bengaluru 560 036, do hereby solemnly affirm on oath and state as follows:-

¶35

1. I am second respondent in the above petition and I know the facts of the case, hence I am swearing to this affidavit.

¶36

2. No.1 I submit that I am legal wedded wife of the petitioner was solemnized on 19/02/2016 at NOTAR marriage Sanjog Bhavan, Umarkhed Village. I gave birth to baby boy. The second petitioner is father of my husband and third petitioner is mother of my husband and petitioner No.4 & 5 are sisters of my husband.

¶37

3. I submit that I have filed complaint before jurisdictional police station i.e. K.R. Puram Police Station making certain allegation against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Section 323,354, 498A, 504, 506 and 149.

¶38

3. It is submit that on the basis of my compliant, 1 respondent police have registered

¶39

¶40

NC: 2024:KHC:41228 CRL.P No. 2065 of 2024

¶41

FIR in Crime No. 306/2020 for the offences punishable under section 323, 354, 498A, 504, 506, 149 of IPC against the petitioners. After investigation the first respondent police have filed charge sheet in C.C. No. 52090/2021 against the petitioners for the offences punishable under section 323, 354, 498A, 504, 506 and 149 of IPC. On pursuance of filing charge sheet the jurisdictional magistrate taken cognizance and issued summons to the petitioners. Being aggrieved by the action of learned magistrate, the petitioner prefers the above petition to quash the proceedings in C.C. No.52090/2021 pending on the file of X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.

¶42

4. I submit that during pendency of above petition I have amicably settled the dispute with my husband and other petitioners and I have decided to join the matrimonial house. At present my husband is working at Dubai and 20 residing there. Now I want to join with my husband Dubai and lead our matrimonial life along with my child. have come forward to compound the offences alleged against the petitioners. Consequently, I am consenting for quashing the proceedings against the petitioners for the offences punishable under section under section 323, 354, 498A, 504, 506 and 149 of IPC in C.C. No.52090/2021 pending on the file of X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru. I have No objection to quash the proceeding against the petitioners and I have not been forced or coerced from any one for this decision. I undertake that I will not raise any dispute with petitioner in future. Accordingly, I pray that the above petition may kindly be allowed as per my affidavit.

¶43

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:41228 CRL.P No. 2065 of 2024

¶44

Wherefore, the Hon'ble court may pleased to compound the offences alleged in the Charge Sheet against the petitioners. Consequently the second respondent consenting for quashing the proceedings of C.C. No.52090/2021 pending on the file of X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru registered against the petitioners for the offences under section 323,354, 498A, 504, 506 and 149 registered by the first respondent police pending in the ends of justice."

¶45

4. In the light of the settlement arrived at

¶46

between the parties, which is a reunion, I deem it appropriate to accept the settlement and quash the impugned proceedings against the petitioners, as the

¶47

dispute is between private parties and the allegations are not against the State.

¶48

For the aforesaid reasons the following:

¶49

ORDER

¶50

a) The criminal petition is disposed.

¶51

b) The impugned proceedings C.C.No.52090/2021 in Crime No.306/2020 of K.R. Puram Police Station, Bengaluru for offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 354, 504 and 506

¶52

¶53

NC: 2024:KHC:41228 CRL.P No. 2065 of 2024

¶54

read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 pending on the file of the X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru is quashed.

¶55

Sd/(M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

¶56

BVK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 92

Kapil Goutham Halwale v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kapil Goutham Halwale v. the State of 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

Sri S Sunil Kumar Vs Sri M Gopal

Sri Suresha Vs the State of Karnataka

State of Karnataka Vs Avinash M S

Venkatesh R Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri Siddaramaiah Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Legends Culture Association (R) Vs State of Karnataka