Allowed

Sri Nyamath Ulla Khan v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC8 Aug 2024CRL.P/2992/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Husband sought quashing of a 498A and dowry prosecution after his relatives' proceedings were quashed on payment terms. Following dissolution of marriage and full payment of Rs.20,00,000/- to the wife, who acknowledged receipt and waived claims, the court quashed the prosecution as a wasteful exercise.

What did the court decide?

Prosecution in C.C.No.59108/2018 under S.498A IPC and Ss.3 and 4 D.P. Act quashed; respondent No.2 directed to cooperate with entries in Khula register.

Sri Nyamath Ulla Khan Vs State of Karnataka — Dowry and Cruelty | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

NC: 2024:KHC:31872 CRL.P No. 2992 of 2024

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024 BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2992 OF 2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI. NYAMATH ULLA KHAN S/O SRI JAHANGEER ULLA KHAN AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT NO.24/4, 2^ND CROSS, HENNUR MAIN ROAD, ST. THOMAS TOWN POST, LINGARAJAPURAM, BANGALORE CITY REP. BY GPA HOLDER MR. HASAN KHAN AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS S/O. SRI JAHANGEER ULLA KHAN R/AT GODOWN ROAD, HOLALUR POST SHIVAMOGGA TQ. AND DIST.-577216

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. RAJARAM T., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KADUGONDANA HALLI POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA.

¶13

SMT. FATHIMA W/O. SRI. NYAMATHULLA KHAN, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/AT NO.680/2, 5^TH CROSS, SHIVANANDA NAGAR, BANGALORE 560075

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SRI. M.R.PATIL, HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR RESPONDENT NO.1;

¶16

SRI. LOKESH R. YADAV, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2)

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:31872 CRL.P No. 2992 of 2024

¶18

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN C.C.NO.59108/2018 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 498A OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3 AND 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT, 1961 PENDING ON THE FILE OF XI ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, MAYHOHALL BENGALURU.

¶19

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

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

The petitioner has challenged the prosecution launched against him by the respondent No.1 in C.C.No.59108/2018 for the offences punishable under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (henceforth referred to as 'IPC' for short) and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (henceforth referred to as 'D.P. Act' for short).

¶23

Based on a report of the respondent No.1, a case in Cr.No.268/2018 was registered by the respondent No.1 for the offences punishable under Section 498A of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of D.P.Act against petitioner and his family members.

¶24

After investigation, a charge sheet was filed against the petitioner, his father, mother and sister for the aforesaid

¶25

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:31872 CRL.P No. 2992 of 2024

¶26

offences. The father, mother and sister of the petitioners filed Crl.P.No.1703/2020 before this Court to quash the proceedings against them. This Court in terms of the order dated 21.12.2023 quashed the proceedings subject to payment of a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- to the respondent No.2. The father, mother and sister of the petitioner had paid a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- to the respondent No.2 through two demand drafts and balance of Rs.10,00,000/- was payable on the dissolution of the marriage.

¶27

It is now stated that marriage of the respondent No.2 with petitioner was dissolved before the Family Court in O.S.No.144/2024. The petitioner who is present in-person has today handed over balance sum of Rs.10,00,000/- through two demand drafts and the respondent No.2 who is present inperson has acknowledged the receipt of said demand drafts. She also admits the receipt of entire sum of Rs.20,00,000/- as agreed. She admitted that she has no more claim against the petitioner and his family members. She also admits that her marriage with the petitioner is dissolved before the family Court

¶28

¶29

NC: 2024:KHC:31872 CRL.P No. 2992 of 2024

¶30

In that view of the matter, since the parties have entered into a settlement and the petitioner has paid the entire amount payable to the respondent No.2 as agreed, the continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner would be a wasteful exercise of time and resource.

¶31

Consequently this petition is allowed and the impugned prosecution of the petitioner in C.C.No.59108/2018 on the file XI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayohall, Bengaluru for the offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of D.P. Act is quashed.

¶32

The respondent No.2 is directed to cooperate with the petitioner in making suitable entries in the Khula register maintained at the Masjid of the petitioner.

¶33

Sd/(R. NATARAJ) JUDGE

¶34

¶35

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5

Sri Nyamath Ulla Khan v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Nyamath Ulla Khan v. 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

P M Bharath Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri J Gopalappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Basavarajappa M Vs the State of Karnataka

S Harsha Vardhana Rao Vs Hmt Limited

Miss Smruthi v Vs the Registrar General

N v Srinivas Vs the Director ( a and Hr)