Allowed

Rohith Kumar Y v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC4 Mar 2024CRL.P/3349/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of criminal proceedings under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 114, 149 IPC and Sections 3, 4, 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The parties had settled the matrimonial dispute in M.C.No.126/2021 with Rs.15,00,000/- alimony and divorce decree. Relying on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, the court held continuation would abuse process of law and quashed proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceedings against petitioners in C.C.No.10233/2021 arising out of Crime No.3/2021 quashed.

Rohith Kumar Y Vs the State of Karnataka — Dowry and Cruelty | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:8864 CRL.P No. 3349 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3349 OF 2022

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

ROHITH KUMAR Y

¶8

S/O LATE YUVARAJKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,

¶9

SUNANDAMMA

¶10

W/O LATE YUVARAJKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,

¶11

PETITIONER NO.1 AND 2 ARE R/AT NO.213/CA -3623, 2^nd CROSS, GIRINAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 085.

¶12

Digitally signed by BHAVANI BAI G Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

KASHI VISHWANATHA S/O LATE KUMARASWAMY M., AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/AT MELUKOTE VILLAGE, PANDAVAPURA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 431.

¶14

SOMASHEKHARA S/O HONNACHAR, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT NO.14/2, 1^st MAIN, B STREET, NEW GUDDADAHALLI,

¶15

¶16

NC: 2024:KHC:8864 CRL.P No. 3349 of 2022

¶17

MYSURU ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 026.

¶18

SMT. JYOTHI W/O SOMASHEKHARA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT NO.95/1, 2^nd PHASE, KSS ANIVARSAN, HOSAHALLI, BENGALURU - 561 203.

¶19

PRADEEP KUMAR S/O GANGADHARA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,

¶20

SMT. KUSUMA W/O PRADEEP KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,

¶21

PETITIONER NO.6 AND 7 ARE R/AT NO.3782, KAUVERI ROAD, GIRI NAGARA, BSK 3^rd STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 085.

¶22

SMT. UMADEVI W/O KASHI VISHWANATHA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT MELUKOTE VILLAGE, PANDAVAPURA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 431.

¶23

VASANTAMMA W/O JANARDHANAMURTHY N.S AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT NO.101, SHRI NILAYA,

¶24

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:8864 CRL.P No. 3349 of 2022

¶25

SHILPA SHRINIVASA CHAR BLOCK, GAYITRIPURAM, MYSURU CITY, MYSURU DISTRICT - 570 019.

¶26

…PETITIONERS

¶27

(BY SRI. VEERESHA H.B. ADVOCATE FOR SRI. H.B. CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE)

¶28

AND:

¶29

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THE MANDYA WEST POLICE, REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶30

SMT. SMITHA R @ PAVITRA R D/O RAMACHAR, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/AT KT-600, 12^th CROSS, CHAMUNDESHWARI NAGAR, MANDYA - 571 401.

¶31

…RESPONDENTS

¶32

(BY SMT. ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP FOR R1-STATE SRI. SHANTH KUMAR. N., ADVOCAE FOR R2-ABSENT)

¶33

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN CR.NO.3/2021 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S.498-A, 323, 504, 506, 114 AND 149 OF IPC AND SEC.3 AND 4 AND 6 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT MANDYA.

¶34

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

¶35

¶36

NC: 2024:KHC:8864 CRL.P No. 3349 of 2022

¶37

ORDER

¶38

This petition is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 8 and 10 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the criminal proceedings in Crime No.3/2021 registered by Mandya West Police, Mandya and charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 114 read with Section 149 of IPC and Sections 3, 4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

¶39

Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the

¶40

petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1-State.

¶41

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 remained absent.

¶42

The case of the petitioners is that on the complaint of respondent No.2, the Police registered FIR for the alleged offences and subsequently, the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 have settled their issues before the Principal Senior Civil and CJM, Mandya in M.C.No.126/2021 where the petitioner No.1 has already

¶43

¶44

NC: 2024:KHC:8864 CRL.P No. 3349 of 2022

¶45

paid Rs.15,00,000/- as permanent alimony to respondent No.2 and she has undertaken to withdraw the complaint and the matrimonial Court has already granted decree of divorce in favour of the parties. Though she has undertaken to co-operate for quashing the criminal proceedings, but she has not supported or co-operated with him to quash the criminal proceedings. Therefore, prayed for quashing the same.

¶46

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, once the matter has been settled between the parties before the Bangalore Mediation Centre in M.C.No.126/2021 where the respondent No.2 agreed to

¶47

co-operate with petitioner No.1 for quashing the criminal proceedings in respect of Crime No.3/2021. Such being the case, as the parties have already settled their dispute in matrimonial case, as per the judgment of the Hon'ble

¶48

Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and Another reported in 2012 CRI.L.J.4934, the

¶49

¶50

NC: 2024:KHC:8864 CRL.P No. 3349 of 2022

¶51

proceedings against the petitioners cannot be continued which amounts to abuse of process of law.

¶52

Accordingly, the petition is allowed .

¶53

The criminal proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.10233/2021 arising out of Crime No.3/2021 registered by Mandya West Police, Mandya is hereby

¶54

quashed.

¶55

Sd/JUDGE

¶56

GBB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24 CT:SK

Rohith Kumar Y v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohith Kumar Y 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manjunatha B J Vs State by

D Venkatesh Vs State of Karnataka

Isak Alias Ichu Vs the State

Sri Praveen Jain Vs State by Basavanagudi Police

Sri Makthar Ahmed Baig Vs Sri. Mallikarjuna Raju

Smt Latharaghavan Vs State by Malleshwaram Police Station