Disposed

Sri T N Shridhar v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC11 Mar 2024CRL.P/5745/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Husband and his parents petitioned to quash proceedings in a dowry-cruelty complaint filed by his wife. After mediation, parties settled amicably; the wife consented to withdraw her complaint and offences were permitted to be compounded under Section 320(6) CrPC, and proceedings were quashed.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to compound offences under S.320(6) CrPC and proceedings in C.C.No.34738/2021 (VI ACMM, Bangalore) were quashed.

Sri T N Shridhar Vs State of Karnataka — Dowry and Cruelty | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:9703 CRL.P No. 5745 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5745 OF 2022

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI T N SHRIDHAR, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, S/O NARAYANAPPA,

¶8

SMT SOUBHAGYA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, W/O NARAYANAPPA,

¶9

SRI NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, LATE S/O SIDDAPPA, PETITIONERS 1 TO 3 ARE R/AT NO.395, 23^RD MAIN ROAD, BTM 2^ND STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 076.

¶10

…PETITIONERS

¶11

(BY SRI KRISHNAMOORTHI L BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR SRI C V SRINIVASA, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by C HONNUR SAB Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MICO LAYOUT PS., BANGALORE - 560070, REPRESENTED BY LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE-560 001.

¶15

SMT CHAITHANYA V, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, W/O T N SRIDHAR, D/O A V VENKATSH MURTHY, R/AT NO.160/27, 2^ND CROSS, PIPELINE ROAD, PRASHANTHINAGAR, NEAR ISRO LAYOUT, BANGALORE - 560 078.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SMT ANITHA, HCGP FOR R1, SRI J T RAJAN AND REGEN RICHARD, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶18

¶19

NC: 2024:KHC:9703 CRL.P No. 5745 of 2022

¶20

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.34738/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE VI ACMM, BANGALORE REGISTERED AGAINST THE PETITIONERS ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.111/2021 REGISTERED AT THE FIRST RESPONDENT POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 498A, 34 OF IPC AND U/S 3,4 OF D.P ACT.

¶21

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

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1 and the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2.

¶24

The petition is filed with a prayer to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.34738/2021 on the file of VI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, for the offences punishable under Section 498A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal code, 1860 and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

¶25

Petitioner No.1 is before this Court, who is the husband of respondent No.2. Petitioners No.2 and 3 are the parents of petitioner No.1. Petitioners are before this Court

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:9703 CRL.P No. 5745 of 2022

¶27

and are identified by the learned counsel for the petitioners. Respondent No.2, who is the wife of petitioner No.1 is also present before this Court and is identified by the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2.

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 jointly submit that the dispute between the parties was referred to the Mediation Centre at Bangalore and on 05.03.2024, parties have entered into a amicable settlement and all the disputes among the parties have been resolved in the presence of the Magistrate.

¶29

Petitioners are before this Court and do not

¶30

dispute the submission made.

¶31

It is further stated that in terms of the settlement arrived between the parties, respondent No.2 has agreed to withdraw her complaint filed before the Jurisdictional Police. Respondent No.2 who is present before this Court has made a statement in this regard.

¶32

¶33

NC: 2024:KHC:9703 CRL.P No. 5745 of 2022

¶34

An application is filed under Section 320(6) of the

¶35

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking permission of this Court to compound the offences.

¶36

For the reasons stated in the application and also after going through the contents of the complaint and the charge sheet placed before this Court, this Court deems it appropriate that permission is to be granted to the petitioners and respondent No.2 to compound the offences.

¶37

Learned High Court Government Pleader has no objection to allow the application.

¶38

Accordingly, application filed under Section 320(6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is allowed and permission is granted to compound the offences.

¶39

Joint memo is also filed incorporating the terms of the settlement and it is agreed between the parties that respondent No.2 has given her consent to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.34738/2021 on the file of VI

¶40

¶41

NC: 2024:KHC:9703 CRL.P No. 5745 of 2022

¶42

Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, referred

¶43

to above.

¶44

12. The joint memo reads as under:

¶45

MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT UNDER SECTION 89 OF CPC READ WITH RULES 24 AND 25 OF THE KARNATAKA CIVIL PROCEDURE (MEDIATION) RULES, 2005.

¶46

I. The petitioner has filed this petition against the respondent under Section 13 (1) (i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 for dissolution of his marriage with the respondent.

¶47

II. The aforesaid petition was referred to mediation for resolving the dispute between the parties. During the course of mediation, the parties along with their respective counsels were present. They have resolved their disputes and have agreed to the following terms and conditions:

¶48

1. The petitioner and respondent are Hindus by religion. Their marriage was solemnized on 20/02/2020 at Poornima Convention Centre, Jayanagar, Bengaluru as per Hindu rites and customs. The parties state that they have no children born to them from their wedlock.

¶49

2. The parties state that and admit that due to irreconcilable differences and incompatibility of temperaments, they are living separately from 06/06/2021. The efforts made by the elders,

¶50

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:9703 CRL.P No. 5745 of 2022

¶51

friends and well-wishers to resolve the differences between the parties did not yield any fruits. There is absolutely no chance of reunion between them. The petitioner and the respondent know that their marriage is irretrievably broken down and there are no chances of reunion to lead a happy married life. Hence the petitioner and the respondent have decided to get their marriage dissolved by a decree of divorce.

¶52

3. The petitioner has agreed to pay a sum of Rs. 8,00,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs only) to the respondent towards all her claims of maintenance/ permanent alimony as full and final settlement. Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Only) by way of Demand Draft in favor of respondent bearing No. 022845 dated 16/02/2024 drawn on HDFC Bank, Bommanahally Branch will be handed over to the respondent before this Hon'ble Court at the time of reporting settlement. Another Demand Draft for Rs. 2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh Fifty Thousand Only)bearing No. 022847 dated 17/02/2024 drawn on HDFC Bank, Bommanahally Branch will be handed over to the respondent at the time of quashing/closing of C.C. No. 34738/2021 in Crl. P. 5745/2022. Another Demand Draft for Rs. 2,50,000/-

¶53

¶54

NC: 2024:KHC:9703 CRL.P No. 5745 of 2022

¶55

bearing No. 022847 dated 17/02/2024 drawn on HDFC Bank, Bommanahally Branch will be handed over to the respondent before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka at the time of quashing the ex-parte order/judgement dated 16/03/2023 passed by Vth Metropolitan Magistrate and Traffic Court, Bangalore in Crl. Misc. No. 143/2021 before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in W.P. in F.R.No. 6463/2024.

¶56

4. The respondent herein undertakes to cooperate in closing/quasing the proceedings in C.C. No. 34738/2021 pending before 6^th ACMM, Bangalore, for the offences punishable under Section 498-A and 34 of IPC and Section 3 & 4 of D.P. Act.

¶57

5. The respondent has agreed to co-operate in setting aside/quashing the ex-parte order/judgement dated 16/03/2023 passed by Vth Metropolitan Magistatre and Traffic Court, Bangalore in Crl. Misc. No. 143/2021.

¶58

6. The petitioner has agreed to withdraw Crl. Misc. No. 168/2023 pending on the file of MMTC-V, Bengaluru.

¶59

7. The petitioner and respondent herein state that neither the petitioner nor the respondent have any claims over movable, immovable assets belonging to petitioner or respondent either at

¶60

8 - NC: 2024:KHC:9703 CRL.P No. 5745 of 2022

¶61

present or to be acquired or inherited at a later stage.

¶62

8. The parties admit and agree that they have no further claims of maintenance / permanent alimony against each other whatsoever manner against each other either past, present or future.

¶63

9. Both the parties state that they have already exchanged their valuable articles and other belongings as such they have no more claims of whatsoever nature against each other.

¶64

10. Both parties agree to withdraw all allegations made against each other.

¶65

11. Both parties further state that there has been no collusion or force, fraud or any undue influence in entering into this settlement agreement in the aforesaid manner.

¶66

12. Both parties admit that they shall not interfere in the lives of each other in future and both the parties undertakes to not publish any photos, videos related to each other in any social media.

¶67

III. In view of the aforesaid agreement entered into between the parties, the parties pray that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to dissolve the marriage solemnized on 20/02/2020 at Poornima Convention

¶68

9 - NC: 2024:KHC:9703 CRL.P No. 5745 of 2022

¶69

Centre, Jayanagar, Bengaluru by a decree of divorce in terms of aforesaid agreement.

¶70

IV. Parties will appear on 11.03.2024 before the Hon'ble Court for passing orders in terms of the agreement.

¶71

In the joint memo, it is stated that respondent No.2 has agreed to receive Rs.2,50,000/- and it is further stated that a Demand Draft dated 17.02.2024 is handed over to respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 acknowledges the receipt of the aforementioned Demand Draft.

¶72

The joint memo filed by the parties is accepted and the proceeding in C.C.No.34738/2021 on the file of VI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore is quashed .

¶73

GVP

¶74

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10

¶75

Sd/JUDGE

Sri T N Shridhar v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri T N Shridhar 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

Sri. Santhosh.S.S Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Honnamma Vs Dr. Usha Rani

Sri. Nagappa S/O Late Ramaiah Vs Sri. N. Khaleel S/O Late Sri. Noor Sab

Smt Muniyamma Vs Smt Chikka Akkayamma W/O.Late Subbaiah

Sri M Ravi S/O Muniyappa Vs Sri Ashok Nakarani S/O Patel Kanthilal

D Sakamma Vs Smt B T Kempamma @ Mani