Allowed

Syed Sadath Pasha v. Mrs Sayeeda Mubashira

Karnataka HC5 Apr 2024CRL.P/6808/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a matrimonial dispute regarding dowry allegations, the High Court of Karnataka quashed criminal proceedings upon acceptance of a joint settlement memo stating the parties were living peacefully after fulfilling the trial court's condition to cohabit for six months.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the proceedings in C.C.No.10959/2014 pending before the 24th ACMM, Bangalore, and also quashed C.Misc.No.59/2014.

Syed Sadath Pasha Vs Mrs Sayeeda Mubashira — Dowry and Cruelty | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:14255 CRL.P No. 6808 of 2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6808 OF 2018 (482)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SYED SADATH PASHA S/O LATE A SYED PEER SAHAB AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,

¶9

KHUSTHERUNNISA W/O LATE A SYED PEER SAHAB AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,

¶10

BOTH ARE R/AT NO. 96, 4^TH MAIN ROAD, GOVINDHA RAJ NAGAR, BANGALORE-40

¶11

PRESENTLY BOTH ARE R/AT NO.766, 2^ND CROSS SHANKARAPPA LAYOUT TIPTUR-572201

¶12

Digitally signed by NARAYANAPPA LAKSHMAMMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

AKHTHERUNNISA D/O SYED KHALANDAR HUSAIN AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/ATN O.1342 M.R.H.P. COLONY BANGALORE-560079

¶14

SYED GHOSE MOHIDDIN S/O SYED KHALANDAR HUSAIN AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/ATN O.1342 M.R.H.P COLONY BANGALORE-560079

¶15

SYED SHAWKATH S/O SYED KHALANDAR HUSAIN AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT GURUGADAHALLI

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:14255 CRL.P No. 6808 of 2018

¶18

TIPTUR TALUK TUMKURU DIST-572201.

¶19

…PETITIONERS

¶20

(BY SRI. S A H RAZVI.,ADVOCATE)

¶21

AND:

¶22

MRS SAYEEDA MUBASHIRA D/O SHED ZAHEER M AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS RESIDING AT 96, 4^TH MAIN ROAD, GOVINDHA RAJ NAGAR, BANGALORE-40

¶23

PRESENTLY AT R/AT NO.766, 2^ND CROSS SHANKARAPPA LAYOUT TIPTUR-5772201

¶24

VIJAYANAGARA POLICE STATION BANGALORE CITY REP BY SPP HIGH COURT BANGALORE-01.

¶25

…RESPONDENTS

¶26

(BY SRI. SYED KHALEEL PASHA AND SMT. KAMALA KUMARI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. CHANNAPPA ERAPPA., HCGP FOR R2)

¶27

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 407 R/W 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.10959/2014 WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE THE XXIV ADDL.C.M.M., BENGALURU AND ETC.

¶28

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

¶29

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:14255 CRL.P No. 6808 of 2018

¶30

ORDER

¶31

The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

¶32

i. Quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.10959/2014 which is pending before the Hon’ble 24^th ACMM at Bangalore.

¶33

ii. Pass such other and further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶34

Petitioner No.1 is the husband and respondent No.1 is the wife. Petitioner No.2 is the mother, petitioner No.3 is the aunt and petitioners No.4 and 5 are maternal uncles of petitioner No.1 respectively.

¶35

In the proceedings which had been filed by respondent No.1 in C.Misc.No.59/2014, a joint memo had been filed came to be partly allowed and on appeal being filed in Criminal Appeal No.680/2015, both the petitioner and respondent No.1 had filed a memo stating that they had amicably settled their disputes and the matter could be disposed. The trial court however gave six months time to the parties to

¶36

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:14255 CRL.P No. 6808 of 2018

¶37

live smoothly and lead a comfortable marital life and did not accept the said compromise. It is challenging the same the petitioners are before this Court.

¶38

The compromise having been filed in the year 2018 more than six months have elapsed from that date. Today a joint memo has been filed by the petitioner and respondent No.1 which reads as under:

¶39

JOINT MEMO

¶40

We Syed sadath pasha S/o Late A. Syed Peer Aged about 40 years 2) Khustherunnisa W/o Late A.Syed Peer, Aged about 70 years. Both are R/at No 96,4th Main road, Govindharajnagar, Bangalore560040 Presently Both are R/at No.766,2nd Cross, Shankarappa Layout, Tiptur572201 3) Akhtherunnisa D/o Syed Khalandar Husain, Aged About 58 years, R/at No.1342,M.R.H.P.Colony, Bangalore -560 079.4) Syed Ghose Mohiddin S/o. Syed Khalandar Husain, Aged About 73 years .R/at No.1342, M.R.H.P.Colony, Bangalore -560 079 5) Syed Shawkath, S/o Syed Khalandar Husain, Aged About 61 years, R/at Gurugadahalli, Tiptur taluk. Tumkur dist -572 201 and 6) Mrs. Sayeeda Mubashira, W/o. Syed sadath pasha, Aged about 35 years. R/at No 96,4th Main road, Govindha raj nagar Bangalore- 40 Presently R/at No.766, 2ND Cross, Shankarappa Layout, Tiptur- 572201, today at Bangalore Do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as follows

¶41

The parties in the above matter respectfully submit as follows

¶42

1. We state that at the intervention of the well wishers, the respondent No-1 and the Petitioners

¶43

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:14255 CRL.P No. 6808 of 2018

¶44

here in have settled the dispute in the following manner:

¶45

2. We state that the respondent No-1/ Mrs. Sayeeda Mubashira was married to Mr.Syed Sadath pasha / accuse No-1 in C.C.No. 10959 /2014 on : 15.11.2009.

¶46

3. The Complainant/Respondent No-1 Mrs. Sayeeda Mubashira On :2702-2014 filed a Dowry complaint against 1) Syed Sadath Pasha (Husband) 2) Khushtherunnissa (Mother in law), 3) Akhtarunnissa (Aunt) 4) Syed Ghouse Mohiudddin (Maternal Uncle) 5) Syed Shoukath (Maternal Uncle), 6) Zubair Ahmed (Friend and colleague) 7) S.N.Nisar Pasha (Friend from Chicknayakanahalli) and 8) Mohammed Fairoz Pasha (Friend from Chicknayakanahalli)

¶47

4. The police investigated the case and filed a charge sheet wherein the Petitioners are arrayed as Accused No- 1 to 5 in C.C.No. 10959 /2014 which is pending 24th ACMM At Bangalore.

¶48

5. We state that the respondent No-1 and her husband / Petitioner/accused No-1 are living smoothly and are leading a comfortable married life from the last 7 years and have been blessed with a child during pendency of the cases, both the parties are residing together along with their children without any dispute and the respondent No-1 here in is withdrawing all the allegations made against the petitioners.

¶49

6. In view of above facts By virtue of this Joint Memo, the petitioners and Respondent No-1 have agreed and undertake to withdraw all Civil, Criminal cases, family court cases and cases filed under D.V. Act pending before any court of law.

¶50

7. In view of above facts By virtue of this Joint Memo, the Petitioner No.1 has agreed and undertakes that he will not remarry in whatsoever circumstances.

¶51

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:14255 CRL.P No. 6808 of 2018

¶52

8. In view of the Joint Memo the above appeal may be disposed off by quashing the proceedings and the petitioners and respondent No-1 confirm that she has no further claim against each other.

¶53

9. The Respondent No 1 has already filed a joint memo in Crl. Petition. No. 7078/2015 filed by the friends of the Husband in view of the settlement same was quashed.

¶54

10. The petitioner No-1 and the respondent No-1 along with their girl child are living separately, in the case of any untoward incident taken place in future after disposal of the above case, in such event, the respondent No-1 as reserve the all rights to file a fresh cases (civil, criminal, family court and D.V.act) against the petitioner No-1/ Husband.

¶55

WHEREFORE, the parties above named respectfully pray that this Hon ble court may be pleased to record this Joint memo and quash the proceedings against petitioners who are accused Nos. 1 to 5 in C.C.No. 10959 / 2014 pending before the 24 additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Bangalore in terms of Joint Memo in the interest of justice. At Bangalore in terms of Joint Memo in the interest of justice.

¶56

The petitioner and respondent No.1 are before this Court in person and are identified by their respective counsel. They submit that they have been living happily together as husband and wife subsequent to the compromise petition filed before the trial Court and continue to do so even as on today.

¶57

¶58

NC: 2024:KHC:14255 CRL.P No. 6808 of 2018

¶59

In that view of the matter, the joint memo is accepted since the only condition which has been imposed by the trial Court was that they should live happily together for more than six months. In that view of the matter, I pass the following:

¶60

ORDER

¶61

i) The Criminal petition is allowed .

¶62

ii) The proceedings in C.C.No.10959/2014 pending

¶63

on the file of 24^th A.C.M.M. at Bangalore and consequently, C.Misc.No.59/2014 on the file of 3^rd MMTC, Bangalore are hereby quashed.

¶64

iii) This Court wishes the couple all the very best in their married life.

¶65

Sd/JUDGE

¶66

PRS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 71

Syed Sadath Pasha v. Mrs Sayeeda Mubashira

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed Sadath Pasha v. Mrs Sayeeda Mubashira

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

Dheerendra C R Vs M/S Unex Cargo Pvt. Ltd. (in Liquidation)

Official Liquidator of M/S Dharma Sugar Industries (P) Ltd. Vs the Manager

S Vinay Gundi Vs M/S Sri Siddeshwara Textiles Mills P Ltd.

Smt Jayamma Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri G N Suresh Vs Sri B v Govindappa

Ms Nousheen Anjum Vs Mr S G Srinivas