Allowed

P Venkata Rao v. State by East Zone Women Police

Karnataka HC19 Jul 2024CRL.P/9587/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Cross criminal petitions arising out of a marital dispute between a wife, her husband and in-laws were resolved by a joint compromise memo recording permanent alimony of Rs.18 lakhs and mutual withdrawal of cases. The High Court accepted the compromise and quashed both pending criminal proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in C.C.Nos.29688/2021 and 51278/2022 on the file of the Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore quashed; all three criminal petitions allowed.

P Venkata Rao Vs State by East Zone Women Police — Dowry and Cruelty | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:28217 CRL.P No. 9587 of 2021 C/W CRL.P No. 5517 of 2022 CRL.P No. 10761 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF JULY, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9587 OF 2021

¶7

C/W

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5517 OF 2022, CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10761 OF 2022

¶9

IN CRL.P.NO.9587/2021

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

P. VENKATA RAO, S/O B. APPALA NAIDU, AGED 68 YEARS,

¶12

Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

RAJESH POLLAROWTHU, S/O P. VENKATA RAO, AGED 38 YEARS, (REP BY HIS GPA HOLDER PETITIONER NO.1),

¶14

SMT. UMA PARVATHY, W/O P. VENKATA RAO, AGED 61 YEARS,

¶15

SMT. VANDANA, W/O RAAM KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, PETITIONER NO.1 TO 4 ARE R/AT NO 150, 2^ND CROSS, OM RESIDENCY LAYOUT,

¶16

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:28217 CRL.P No. 9587 of 2021 C/W CRL.P No. 5517 of 2022 CRL.P No. 10761 of 2022

¶17

BEHIND TAR FACTORY, KODIGEHALLI MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU – 36.

¶18

…PETITIONERS

¶19

(BY SRI. S.N. BHAT., ADVOCATE)

¶20

AND:

¶21

STATE BY EAST ZONE WOMEN POLICE, BENGALURU – 560 001. REPRESENTED BY S.P.P., HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶22

SMT. S. GAYATHRI, W/O RAJESH POLLAROWTHU, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT NO.178, 4^TH CROSS, MUNIYAPPA LAYOUT, K.R.PURAM, BENGALURU – 560 036.

¶23

AND ALSO R/AT NO.107/F, B.B.ROAD, PERAMBUR, CHENNAI, TAMILNADU – 600 039.

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SMT.WAHEED, HCGP FOR R1; SRI.B.V.MANJUNATHA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶26

THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.29688/2021 ON THE FILE OF VI ADDL.C.M.M., BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498(A), 323, 504 R/W 34 OF IPC AND SECTION 3 AND 4

¶27

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:28217 CRL.P No. 9587 of 2021 C/W CRL.P No. 5517 of 2022 CRL.P No. 10761 of 2022

¶28

OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT, CHARGE SHEET FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT POLICE.

¶29

IN CRL.P.NO.5517/2022

¶30

BETWEEN:

¶31

MR.BABU RAO, SON OF NAGAMIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,

¶32

MRS.GAYATHRI, DAUGHTER OF MR.BABU RAO, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.107/F, FIRST FLOOR, B.B.ROAD, PERAMBUR, CHENNAI – 600 011.

¶33

SHRI.M.PURUSHOTHAMAN, SON OF SATHYA RAO, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, NO.32/301, H.P.NAGAR, EAST COLONY, VASHINAKA, CHEMBUR, MUMBAI – 400 074.

¶34

…PETITIONERS

¶35

(BY SRI. BHARATHRAJ J., ADVOCATE)

¶36

AND:

¶37

STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY K.R.PURAM POLICE STATION, BENGALURU – 560 036.

¶38

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:28217 CRL.P No. 9587 of 2021 C/W CRL.P No. 5517 of 2022 CRL.P No. 10761 of 2022

¶39

SHRI. VENKATA RAO, MALE, S/O B. APPALA NAIDU, AGED 66 YEARS, SHRI.DURGA NILAYAM, 150, 2^ND CROSS, OM RESIDENTIAL LAYOUT, KODIGEHALLI MAIN ROAD, K.R.PURAM POST, BENGALURU – 560 036.

¶40

…RESPONDENTS

¶41

(BY SMT.RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R1; SMT.KATHYAYINI DEVI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.V.LAKSHMI KANTH RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶42

THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR REGISTERED BEFORE K.R.PURAM P.S., AT BENGALURU IN CR.NO.401/2020 AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS AS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS IN C.C.NO.51278/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE X A.C.M.M., BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 341, 323, 506 READ WITH 34 OF IPC INITIATED BY THE RESPONDENT THROUGH THE COMPLAINT/P.C.R NO.51156/2020.

¶43

IN CRL.P.NO.10761/2022

¶44

BETWEEN:

¶45

MRS.DURGA, W/O BABU RAO, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.107/F BB ROAD, PERAMBUR, CHENNAI – 600 039.

¶46

…PETITIONER

¶47

(BY SRI. BHARATHRAJ J., ADVOCATE)

¶48

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:28217 CRL.P No. 9587 of 2021 C/W CRL.P No. 5517 of 2022 CRL.P No. 10761 of 2022

¶49

AND:

¶50

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY K.R.PURAM POLICE STATION, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA – 560 036.

¶51

SHRI. VENKAT RAO POLAROWTHU, S/O B. APPALA NAIDU, AGED 66 YEARS, SHRI.DURGA NILAYAM, 150, 2^ND CROSS, OM RESIDENTIAL LAYOUT, KODIGEHALLI MAIN ROAD, K.R.PURAM POST, BENGALURU – 560 036.

¶52

…RESPONDENTS

¶53

(BY SMT.RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R1)

¶54

THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT DATED 06.02.2020 IN PCR NO.51156/2020 BEFORE THE X A.C.M.M., BENGALURU (ANNEXURE – A) AND ETC.,

¶55

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

¶56

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA

¶57

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:28217 CRL.P No. 9587 of 2021 C/W CRL.P No. 5517 of 2022 CRL.P No. 10761 of 2022

¶58

ORAL ORDER

¶59

Criminal Petition No. 9587/2021 arises out of the complaint lodged by the wife against her husband and her in-laws. Crl.P.Nos.10761/2022 and 5517/2022 arise out of the criminal compliant lodged by the father-in-law and the mother-in-law against the wife-Smt. Gayathiri w/o Rajesh Polatowthu and her relatives.

¶60

Today, a joint compromise memo is filed in all

¶61

the three petitions, the terms of which, read as follows:

¶62

"Both the petitioner and respondent file this joint compromise memo as follows:

¶63

During the mediation in the Presence of the Honourable Judge of the Metropolitan Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court dated 06.07.2024, at Chennai, the petitioner No 2 herein in Criminal petition No: 5517/2022 and the petitioner no 2 herein in CRL.P 9587/2021 agreed to settle the issues amicably on the following terms:-

¶64

1) The petitioner MRS GAYATHRI and the respondent MR. RAJESH POLAROWTHU felt that their marriage had irretrievably broken down due to

¶65

¶66

NC: 2024:KHC:28217 CRL.P No. 9587 of 2021 C/W CRL.P No. 5517 of 2022 CRL.P No. 10761 of 2022

¶67

their difference of opinion and incompatibility. Therefore, they have decided to settle the issues amicably by filing this Joint Compromise Memo.

¶68

2) The respondent paid part payment of Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees Five lakhs) to the petitioner Gayathri by way of D.D. No. 000995 Dated 08.07.2024 of Axis Bank, Hoodi Branch, Bangalore and the same is received by the petitioner Gayathri and the respondent Rajesh .P has agreed to pay the balance amount of Rs.13,00,000/- (Rupees thirteen Lakhs) at the time of Final disposal of the joint petition filed under 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 at Chennai.

¶69

3) The Respondent/petitioners have no objection to quash the following cases filed by each other and also against their family members.

¶70

b. The 2nd respondent Venkat Rao has no objection to allow the CRL.Ptn No: 5517/2022 and 10761/2022 pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka for quashing the proceedings filed by Gayathri and others and Durga for quashing the CC No: 51278/2022 charged for offences U/s 341, 323, 506 IPC pending on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mayo Hall, Bangalore City.

¶71

¶72

NC: 2024:KHC:28217 CRL.P No. 9587 of 2021 C/W CRL.P No. 5517 of 2022 CRL.P No. 10761 of 2022

¶73

b. The 2nd respondent Gayathri has no objection to allow the CRL.Ptn. No: 9587/2021 pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka for quashing the proceedings filed by Venkat Rao for quashing the CC No: 29688/2021 charged for offences U/s 498(A),323,504 and 34 IPC read with section 3 and 4 of DV Act pending on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitian Magistrate, Mayo Hall, Bangalore City.

¶74

C. The petitioner/Rajesh filed a Dissolution of Divorce Petition in MC No: 735/2020 U/s 13(1) (i-a) that was initially filed in the Court of Honourable Principal Family Judge at Bangalore and the same that has been transferred to the Honourable Family Court at Chennai as O.P. No. 1655/2023 which is already closed as per the compromise memo.

¶75

d. Both parties have withdrawn the Conjugal Rights Petition in H.M.O.P.No.3067/2020 U/s Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act in Honourable 1st Additional Family Court at Chennai which is already closed as per the compromise memo.

¶76

e. Both parties have withdrawn Maintenance petition U/s 125 in M.C.No.108/2022 in Honourable 1st

¶77

¶78

NC: 2024:KHC:28217 CRL.P No. 9587 of 2021 C/W CRL.P No. 5517 of 2022 CRL.P No. 10761 of 2022

¶79

Additional Family Court at Chennai which is already closed as per the compromise memo.

¶80

g. Domestic Violence Petition in DVC.No.18/2022 at Metropolitan Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court at Egmore, Chennai which is already closed as per the compromise memo.

¶81

4) It is further agreed that the Respondent will return the Sridhana articles consisting of one set of gold Bangles, two gold rings, one gold necklace, one gold chain, and one silver pot to Petitioner and the Petitioner will return one Mangalyam Chain, one Mangalasutra, one gold ring and one pair of silver anklet to the respondent at the time of Final disposal of the joint petition filed under 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 at Chennai.

¶82

5) Further, the Petitioner will close the joint locker account 00000036224683995 in State Bank of India, KR Puram Branch, Bangalore after withdrawing all the cases by the parties and closing any account in the name of the petitioner located at Bangalore.

¶83

6) Both the petitioner and respondent undertake, not to file any enquiries pertaining the personal information, complaint against each other before the

¶84

10 -

¶85

NC: 2024:KHC:28217 CRL.P No. 9587 of 2021 C/W CRL.P No. 5517 of 2022 CRL.P No. 10761 of 2022

¶86

police authorities or court of law or before any allIndia Government forum between each other and their family members and should not disturb the each other's future marital life.

¶87

(7) The Petitioner waive her right to claim any past, present or future maintenance from the Respondent's title interest, possession, inheritance, succession or claim over the movable and immovable properties for which the Petitioner has also agreed. The same was acknowledged by the Respondent.

¶88

8) The Respondent waive his right to claim any past, present or future maintenance, from the Petitioner's title interest, possession, inheritance, succession or claim over the movable and immovable properties of the Petitioner and the same was agreed by the Respondent.

¶89

9) Both the parties do not have any grievance against each other and their family members and they have duly and peacefully settled the same to their entire satisfaction.

¶90

10) Whereas the parties hereto do not have any grievance left against each other including their family members, therefore, in view of the same,

¶91

11 -

¶92

NC: 2024:KHC:28217 CRL.P No. 9587 of 2021 C/W CRL.P No. 5517 of 2022 CRL.P No. 10761 of 2022

¶93

they have further undertaken that they shall not level any legations against each other or each other's parents or each other's family members cause to act in a manner so as to harm the each other family's on basis of the caste, social class, reputation and image of the other, in the family or the society at large.

¶94

11) The parties have mutually agreed that after the Petitioner receives Rs. 16,00,000/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs Only) and an additional of Rs 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) towards the missing Gold ornaments as agreed by both parties totalling Rs. 18,00,000.00/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakhs only) as Permanent alimony, both petitioner and respondent or their family members shall not have any claim left against the other Party or their family members of any kind whatsoever and they will not claim any type of maintenance, alimony etc., as it is a full and final Alimony which covers all the claims of the respective parties.

¶95

12) It is further agreed between the parties that in case of breach/violation or wilful/deliberate disobedience of either the settlement deals or its terms and conditions, the party breaching the terms, shall be liable for contempt proceeding and

¶96

12 -

¶97

NC: 2024:KHC:28217 CRL.P No. 9587 of 2021 C/W CRL.P No. 5517 of 2022 CRL.P No. 10761 of 2022

¶98

the party aggrieved shall be entitled for status quoanti in every possible way.

¶99

13) Respondent and Petitioner also agreed along with m. family members and known people that they will not initiate or pursue any legal case, complaint, claim, inquiry pertaining the personal information, or any appeal against each other and their family members via known or unknown source.

¶100

14) That the above said settlement and its terms and conditions have been entered and executed between the parties with their free consent and the consent of their respective family members with their will and without any force, undue pressure, influence, misrepresentation or mistake (both law and fact) in any form, and statement, agreement has been correctly recorded the said agreed terms are without any inducement or coercion from any corner whatsoever.

¶101

15) For the reasons stated above in this joint compromise memo it is respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to record this join compromise memo in the above in CRL.Pet. 5517/2022, CRL.P 10761/2022 and CRL. Pet. 9587/2021 and On the file of this Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka and consequently order quashing

¶102

13 -

¶103

NC: 2024:KHC:28217 CRL.P No. 9587 of 2021 C/W CRL.P No. 5517 of 2022 CRL.P No. 10761 of 2022

¶104

of the CC No: 29688/2021 on the file of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore City and CC No: 51278/2022on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan, Mayo hall, Bangalore City, as settled and pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity."

¶105

The husband and wife are present before the

¶106

Court and the wife admits the execution of compromise petition and also submits that she has received a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- by way of D.D.No.000995 dated 08.07.2024 of Axis Bank, Hoodi Branch, Bangalore from her husband and agrees to receive the balance amount of Rs. 13,00,000/- as indicated in the joint compromise memo.

¶107

In view of the fact that the dispute is essentially, between the two families which arose out of a marital dispute, it would be appropriate to accept the compromise memo and quash both the proceedings in

¶108

14 -

¶109

NC: 2024:KHC:28217 CRL.P No. 9587 of 2021 C/W CRL.P No. 5517 of 2022 CRL.P No. 10761 of 2022

¶110

C.C.Nos.29688/2021 and 51278/2022 pending on the file

¶111

of the Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore.

¶112

Accordingly, proceedings in C.C.Nos.29688/2021 and 51278/2022 pending on the file of the Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore are quashed.

¶113

Consequently, the Criminal petitions are allowed.

¶114

Sd/(N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE

¶115

JS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23 CT:SN

P Venkata Rao v. State by East Zone Women Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P Venkata Rao v. State by East Zone Women Police

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

Siddamma Vs the Executive Engineer

Mahesha K M Vs State by Sub-Inspector of Police

Smt. Muniyamma Vs the Chief Manager

Alpine Pyramid Apartment Vs the Bangalore Electiricity Company Limited

Rajamma Vs the Managing Director Kptcl

H Narasimhamurthy Vs the Secretary Regional Transport Authority