Quashed

Mr. Abdul Mushahid v. State by Chandra Layout P S

Karnataka HC4 Sept 2024CRL.P/8054/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Husband and his parents sought to quash proceedings pending before the XLVI ACMM Bengaluru for offences under Sections 498A and 34 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Parties had amicably settled disputes through mediation with a memorandum filed under the Karnataka Mediation Rules. Court quashed proceedings qua petitioners.

What the court decided

AI extract

Mr. Abdul Mushahid Vs State by Chandra Layout P S — Dowry and Cruelty | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:36217 CRL.P No. 8054 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8054 OF 2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

MR. ABDUL MUSHAHID S/O ABDUL MAJEED, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/AT NO. 710, 2^ND MAIN, GANGONDANAHALLI, BENGALURU SOUTH, BENGALURU – 560 039.

¶8

Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶9

MR. ABDUL MAJEED S/O LATE ABDUL KAREEM, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, R/AT NO. 710, 2^ND MAIN, GANGONDANAHALLI, BENGALURU SOUTH, BENGALURU – 560 039.

¶10

SALEEM UNNISA W/O ABDUL MAJEED, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT NO.710, 2^ND MAIN, GANGONDANAHALLI, BENGALURU SOUTH, BENGALURU – 560 039.

¶11

PRESENTLY PETITIONER NOS.2 AND 3 RESIDING AT

¶12

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:36217 CRL.P No. 8054 of 2024

¶13

NO.85, BCCC LAYOUT, OPPOSITE TO BBMP OFFICE, 2^ND STAGE, CHANDRA LAYOUT, BENGALURU – 560 040.

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SMT. SHAHIDA KHANAM J., ADVOCATE)

¶16

AND:

¶17

STATE BY CHANDRA LAYOUT P.S REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶18

MS. SAYEEDA NAVEEN BANU D/O SYED AKRAM, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, NO. 22, 2^ND FLOOR, MASJID STREET, OPP. TO AKBARI MASJID, ANEPALYA, NEELASANDRA, BENGALURU – 560 047.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SMT.SOWMYA R., HCGP FOR R-1; SRI M.O.SULTAN, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

¶21

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 528 OF BHARTIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITHA, 2023 PRAYING TO a) QUASH THE FIR FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 i.e., CHANDRA LAYOUT P.S., IN CR.NO.100/2018 DTD 03.03.2018 (CC.NO.24684/2018) FILED FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 3 AND 4 OF DP ACT, SEC 498-A R/W 34 OF IPC FILED AGAINST THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO. 1 TO 3 PRESENTLY PENDING FOR DISPOSAL ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED 46^th ACMM AT BENGALURU VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,

¶22

¶23

NC: 2024:KHC:36217 CRL.P No. 8054 of 2024

¶24

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

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

Petitioners are before this Court seeking to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.24684 of 2018 pending before the learned XLVI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru registered for offences punishable under Sections 498A r/w Section 34 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

¶28

The parties to the lis were also before the Family Court, Bangalore in O.S.No.107 of 2024 wherein they have settled the dispute amicably between themselves before the Mediation Centre by drawing up certain terms of settlement. A memorandum of settlement is also filed under Section 89 r/w Rules 24 and 25 of the Karnataka Civil Procedure (Mediation) Rules, 2005. One of the conditions of settlement also recognizes closure of the present proceedings. The terms insofar as it is germane to the present lis reads as follows:

¶29

¶30

NC: 2024:KHC:36217 CRL.P No. 8054 of 2024

¶31

“….

¶32

5. Both the parties state that they have already exchanged their articles and other valuable belongings and they have no claims in this regard.

¶33

6. In view of this settlement, the plaintiff has agreed to withdraw Crl.Misc.No.8/2018 pending on the file of MMTCI, Bengaluru filed against the defendant herein under DV Act, as not pressed.

¶34

7. The plaintiff also agrees and undertakes to co-operate in closing/quashing C.C.No.24684/2018 pending on the file of 46^th ACMM, Bengaluru filed against the defendant and his family members for the offences punishable under Section 498-A r/w 34 of IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of D.P. Act, In accordance with law.

¶35

8. The plaintiff also agrees to withdraw G & W.C.No.89/2024 pending before II Addl. Family Court, Bengaluru filed against the defendant herein.

¶36

9. The parties state that, they have no claims of whatsoever nature against each other and also in respect of movable/ immovable properties belonging to each other.

¶37

10. In view of this settlement, both the parties hereby unconditionally withdraw all the allegations made against each other either in this suit or in connected cases either expressly or orally.

¶38

11. Both the parties undertake that they shall not interfere with the life of each other in future.”

¶39

Learned counsel for the parties would submit that all

¶40

other conditions in the settlement stands fulfilled and the complainant has no objection to quash the proceedings.

¶41

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:36217 CRL.P No. 8054 of 2024

¶42

Since the offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Sections 498A of the IPC inter alia and not against the State or the Society, and in the light of the settlement arrived at between the parties as aforesaid, I deem it appropriate to obliterate the proceedings pending against the petitioners.

¶43

For the aforesaid reasons, the following:

¶44

ORDER

¶45

(i) Criminal Petition is disposed.

¶46

(ii) The impugned proceedings in C.C.No.24684 of 2018 pending on the file of XLVI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru stands quashed qua the petitioners.

¶47

Sd/(M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

¶48

BKP

¶49

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 120

Mr. Abdul Mushahid v. State by Chandra Layout P S

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Mr. Abdul Mushahid v. State by Chandra Layout P S

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Ashok Abrahim Kuriakose Vs State of Karnataka

M/S. Siddhasiri Souharda Sahakari Niyamit Vs Karnataka State Pollution Control Board (Kspcb)

Gaurav Dahake Vs the Union of India

Mr v Govinda Raj Vs State of Karnataka

Sri G Devarajegowda Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Srinidhi Chinnam Vs K B Yarriswamy