Sri. Chandan Patil R S/O Ratnakar Patil Vs the State of Karnataka

SHRI CHANDAN PATIL R. S/O. RATNAKAR PATIL, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/AT. SRI. VEERABADRESHWARA KRUPA, WARD NO.35, BANK COLONY, SASTRI NAGAR EXTENSION, BALLARI-583101.

¶13

Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench

¶14

(BY SRI. G. M. GADILINGAPPA, ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

…PETITIONER

¶17

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, WOMENS POLICE STATION, HAVERI, REP. BY LEARNED STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, THE HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD-580001.

¶18

SMT. RUCHI W/O. CHANDAN PATIL R. MATHAPATI, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/AT. MRUTHYUNJAYA NAGAR,

¶19

2 -

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8447 CRL.P No. 101796 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 102388 of 2023

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

2ND CROSS, RANEBENNUR, HAVERI-DISTRICT-581115.

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SRI. JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. P. I. BADIGER, ADV. FOR R2)

¶25

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. (U/S. 528 OF BNSS, 2023) SEEKING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C. NO.737/2023 (CRIME NO.82/2022) HAVERI WOMEN P.S. PENDING ON THE FILE OF 2^ND ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, RANEBENNUR AGAINST THIS PETITIONER / ACCUSE NO. 1 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S.498A, 323, 504, 506 R/W. 34 OF IPC AND FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S.3 AND 4 OF DP ACT 1961 OF WOMEN’S POLICE STATION AT HAVERI AND ETC.

¶26

IN CRL. P. NO. 102388 OF 2023

¶27

BETWEEN:

¶28

SMT SHAILAJA SHETTAR, W/O. RATNAKAR PATIL, AGE: 63 YEARS, OCC: RETIRED EMPLOYEE/HOUSEHOLD, R/O. AT HOSPETE BALDOTA COLONY, CITY HOSPITAL NEAR, TQ. HOSPETE, VIJAYANAGAR, NOW RESIDING AT: KRISNAREDDY PET, DIST. SANGAREDDY, HYDERABAD.

¶29

SRI. NANDAN PATIL R. S/O. RATNAKAR PATIL, AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: EMPLOYEE, R/O. AT HOSPETE BOLDOTA COLONY, CITY HOSPITAL NEAR, TQ.HOSPETE, VIJAYANAGAR.

¶30

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8447 CRL.P No. 101796 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 102388 of 2023

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

NOW RESIDING AT KRISNAREDDY PET, DIST. SANGAREDDY, HYDERABAD

¶33

…PETITIONERS

¶34

(BY SRI. N. R. KUPPELUR, ADVOCATE)

¶35

AND:

¶36

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, WOMENS POLICE STATION, HAVERI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SP.P., HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD.

¶37

SMT. RUCHI W/O. CHANDAN PATIL R. MATHAPATI, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. MRUTHYUNJAYA NAGAR, 2ND CROSS, RANEBENNUR, DIST. HAVERI-581116.

¶38

…RESPONDENTS

¶39

(BY SRI. JAIRAM SIDD, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. PUNEET I. BADIGER, ADV. FOR R2)

¶40

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.PC., SEEKING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 11.07.2023 OF TAKING COGNIZANCE AGAINST THE PETITIONERS AS ACCUSED NO. 2 AND 3 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S.498A, 323, 504, 506 R/W. 34 OF IPC AND FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 3 AND 4 OF THE DP ACT 1961 AND ALSO FOR QUASHING THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C. NO.737/2023 ON THE FILE OF 2ND ADDL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC RANEBENNUR IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER HEREIN/ACCUSED NO.2 AND 3 ARE CONCERNED, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND ETC.

¶41

THESE PETITION ARE COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶42

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8447 CRL.P No. 101796 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 102388 of 2023

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

ORAL ORDER

¶45

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T)

¶46

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 3, learned counsel for respondent No.2-the de facto complainant and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State.

¶47

The petitioner-accused No.1 has filed Criminal Petition No.101796/2025 and the petitioners-accused Nos.2 and 3 have filed Criminal Petition No.102388/2023 under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure [528 of BNSS, 2023], praying to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.737/2023, pending on the file of II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Ranebennur, in connection with Haveri Women Police Station Crime No.82/2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

¶48

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8447 CRL.P No. 101796 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 102388 of 2023

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

Brief facts of the prosecution case are that;

¶51

On 02.12.2022, the de facto complainant-respondent No.2 lodged a complaint against accused Nos.1 to 3 alleging that on 30.04.2020 her marriage was performed with accused No.1 in Sub-Registrar Office, Ranebennur. After the marriage, their relationship was cordial for couple of months, thereafter, accused No.1 started harassing the complainant to bring dowry. It is also alleged that accused Nos.2 and 3 physically and mentally harassed her. Hence, the first informant lodged complaint against the accused persons, which led to registration of the FIR and initiation of investigation.

¶52

Now, the petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 3 and the de facto complainant have resolved their disputes with the intervention of elders and well-wishers from both families. The de facto complainant and accused Nos.1 to 3 are present before the Court.

¶53

6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8447 CRL.P No. 101796 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 102388 of 2023

¶54

HC-KAR

¶55

In view of settlement, the petitioners-accused

¶56

Nos.1 to 3 and respondent No.2 have filed a compromise petition under Section 482 read with Section 320 of Cr.P.C. The contents of compromise petition read as under:

¶57

“The advocate for the Petitioner most respectfully submits as under:

¶58

It is respectfully submitted that Respondent No.2 is the legally wedded wife of Chandan Patil R, who is the petitioner herein and also arrayed as Accused No.1 in C.C. No.737/2023 (Crime No.82/2022). After the solemnization of marriage, Respondent No.2 voluntarily her deserted husband, i.e., this petitioner/Accused No.1 (Chandan Patil R), leading to matrimonial dispute between the parties. As a result of the said matrimonial discord, the parties have been residing separately since then.

¶59

That, the Respondent No.2 on 02-12-2022 had lodged complaint against this petitioner and also on the mother and brother of the petitioner herein for the offences punishable under section 498(A), 323, 504, 506 R/w 34 of IPC and for the offences punishable U/s 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act 1961. Pursuant to the said complaint, a case was registered in C.C. No.737/2023 (arising out of Crime No.82/2022), which is presently pending for consideration before the Hon'ble file of II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, at Ranebennur, and the petitioner have approached this Hon'ble Court seeking to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.737/2023 (Crime No.82/2022) pending for consideration before the Hon'ble II Additional

¶60

7 -

¶61

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8447 CRL.P No. 101796 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 102388 of 2023

¶62

HC-KAR

¶63

Senior Civil Judge and JMFC Ranebennur, in the above petition.

¶64

It is submitted in the present case, the matrimonial dispute between this petitioner and Respondent No.2 has been amicably resolved through the intervention of elders and wellwishers. The petitioner herein, who is the husband of Respondent No.2, had initially filed a divorce petition before the Hon'ble Senior Civil Judge and J.M.F.C at Bengaluru Rural district in M.C No. 602/2022. Subsequently, the Respondent No.2 filed a transfer petition before this Hon'ble court in C.P No: and the same was allowed. Pursuant thereto, the divorce petition was transferred to the Hon'blePrl. Family Court at Haveri and re-numbered as M.C.No.01/2024. Thereafter, both the Petitioner/Accused No.1 and the Respondent No.2 arrived at a mutual understanding and agreed to dissolve the marriage amicably. In furtherance of the settlement, both the parties filed a joint memo before the Hon'ble Prl. Family Judge at Haveri on 16-11-2024. Based on the said memo, the Hon'ble Prl. Family Judge at Haveri was pleased to allow the divorce petition and accordingly granted the decree of divorce. In light of the above settlement and the dissolution of the marriage by mutual consent, Respondent No.2 has expressed her intention not to pursue the criminal proceedings initiated against this petitioner and also on the mother and brother of this petitioner in CC.No.737/2023.

¶65

Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to permit the parties to compound the aforesaid offences punishable under section 498(A), 323, 504, 506 R/w 34 of IPC and for the offences punishable under section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act 1961, in terms of the compromise entered into between them as detailed in the report filed before this Hon'ble Court, in the interest of justice and equity.”

¶66

8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8447 CRL.P No. 101796 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 102388 of 2023

¶67

HC-KAR

¶68

In support of the compromise petition, accused No.1 and respondent No.2-the de facto complainant have filed joint memo. The contents of the joint memo read as under;

¶69

“That, the petitioner and the respondent No.2 in the above matter most respectfully submits as under:

¶70

That the marriage between the petitioner and Respondent No.2 herein was solemnized and got registered at Sub Registrar Office, Ranebennur on 30-04-2020 and thereafter marriage ceremony was held as per Hindu customs and practice and there are no issues out of the said marriage. Respondent no.2/Complainant started living separately since June 2021.

¶71

That on 02-12-2022 Respondent No.2 had lodged complaint against her husband i.e., this petitioner and two others who are the mother and brother of the petitioner herein for offence punishable under section 498(A), 323, 504, 506 of IPC R/w offences punishable under section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act 1961. That aforesaid case was registered in C.C. No.737/2023 (Crime No.82/2022) pending for consideration before the Hon'ble file of II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC Ranebennur. The petitioner has filed the above petition seeking to quash the proceedings in CC No. 737/2023.

¶72

It is submitted that at the intervention of elders and well-wishers the dispute between them is amicably resolved in terms of the settlement and the petitioner herein and Respondent No.2 have agreed to resolving the dispute bete, chem and the marriage of the petitioner and

¶73

9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8447 CRL.P No. 101796 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 102388 of 2023

¶74

HC-KAR

¶75

Respondent No.2 dissolved and further it is agreed to withdraw all the allegation against each other and all the pending cases against each other.

¶76

That the parties state that there are no claims pending against each other at present and in future and the Respondent No.2 is free from all the marital obligations from the petitioner and respondent No: 2 also made free from them. The articles of parties have already been exchanged they have acknowledged the same in between them.

¶77

That in compliance of the terms of the agreement the petitioner herien and the Respondent No.2 is presenting this Joint Memo along with application seeking leave of this Hon'ble Court to withdraw the complaint in order to resolve the dispute.

¶78

WHEREFORE it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to allow the parties to withdraw all allegations and the criminal cases made against each other by allowing the above petition in the interest of justice and equity.”

¶79

7. Learned counsels for petitioners-accused Nos.1

¶80

to 3, respondent No.2-de facto complainant and learned

¶81

HCGP for respondent No.1- State submit that, in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, the Court may accept the compromise petition and quash the proceedings.

¶82

8. Perused the material available on record.

¶83

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8447 CRL.P No. 101796 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 102388 of 2023

¶84

10 -

¶85

HC-KAR

¶86

The complainant having agreed to withdraw the allegations i.e., the complaint registered against the petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 3, since she has compromised the dispute with the petitioners-accused persons, it will be a futile exercise, if the petitionersaccused Nos.1 to 3 are subjected to trial, since the probability of their conviction is remote and bleak in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties. Hence, the continuation of the criminal proceedings will be an abuse of process of law.

¶87

In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, it is just and necessary to allow the compromise petition and parties are permitted to compound the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of D.P.Act. Hence, this Court is of the opinion that the compromise arrived at between the parties is hereby accepted and criminal proceedings in C.C.No.737/2023 on the file of learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge and

¶88

11 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8447 CRL.P No. 101796 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 102388 of 2023

¶89

HC-KAR

¶90

JMFC, Ranebennur, arising out of Crime No.82/2022 of Haveri Women Police Station, are required to be quashed.

¶91

Hence, this Court proceeds to pass the

¶92

following:

¶93

ORDER

¶94

i. The joint application filed by both the parties under Section 482 read with Section 320 of Cr.P.C., is accepted.

¶95

ii. Both the criminal petitions filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., [Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023], is disposed of.

¶96

iii. The entire proceedings initiated against the petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 3 in C.C.No.737/2023, pending on the file of II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Ranebennur, in connection with Haveri Women Police Station Crime No.82/2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of D.P.Act., are quashed.

¶97

12 -

¶98

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8447 CRL.P No. 101796 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 102388 of 2023

¶99

HC-KAR

¶100

iv. In view of the disposal of the criminal petition, pending applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and the same stand disposed of.

¶101

Sd/(VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE

¶102

AM/CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 65

Sri. Chandan Patil R S/O Ratnakar Patil v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Chandan Patil R S/O Ratnakar Patil v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. N. Channabasavana Gouda S/O Doddanagowda Vs the State of Karnataka

Surendra Gundu Ugare Vs the State of Karnataka

Pavan Kumar Nandavaram S/O Srinivas Vs the State of Karnataka

Abhishek Prakash Ankad Vs State of Karnataka Represented by

Smt. Bagyamma N Chalageri W/O Nagaraj Chalageri Vs the CBI (Central Bureau of Investigation)

Shri Ameet S/O Avinash Mane Vs the State of Karnataka