Allowed¶39

Vismitha v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC21 Nov 2025CRL.P/10524/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C.; matrimonial dispute; amicable settlement; joint memo dated 13.11.2025; complainant not interested in prosecution; IPC Sections 324, 427, 504, 506 r/w 34; C.C.No.7921/2023; XXXII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru; Crime No.374/2022; Giri Nagar Police; Karnataka High Court; M.I. Arun J.; NC: 2025:KHC:48141; decision dated 21.11.2025.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the proceedings in C.C.No.7921/2023 (registered pursuant to Crime No.374/2022) pending before the XXXII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru. ¶39

Vismitha Vs State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the proceedings in C.C.No.7921/2023 (registered pursuant to Crime No.374/2022) pending before the XXXII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.

¶39

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal proceedings in C.C.No.7921/2023 (registered pursuant to Crime No.374/2022) for offences punishable under Sections 324, 504, 506, 427 r/w Section 34 of IPC, arising out of a matrimonial dispute that has since been amicably settled, ought to be quashed in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on the petition of the accused-wife and her brother.

¶26

Court's answer

On account of the amicable settlement of the matrimonial dispute (joint memo dated 13.11.2025), the complainant's expressed lack of interest in prosecuting the complaint, and the absence of objection from the learned High Court Government Pleader, the proceedings in C.C.No.7921/2023 registered pursuant to Crime No.374/2022, pending before the XXXII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, stand quashed.

¶38

Ratio / Principle

The criminal petition stands allowed accordingly.

¶39

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CRIMINAL PETITION (S.482 Cr.P.C.) — Quashing upon amicable settlement of matrimonial dispute. High Court of Karnataka (M.I. Arun, J.), order dated 21.11.2025, Crl.P. No. 10524 of 2023 (NC: 2025:KHC:48141): Petitioners Vismitha (accused-wife) and Santhosh (her brother) sought quashing of proceedings in C.C.No.7921/2023, registered pursuant to Crime No.374/2022 of respondent no.1-Police (Giri Nagar Police), pending before the XXXII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, for offences under Sections 324, 427, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC arising out of a matrimonial dispute with the complainant-husband (respondent no.2, Manjunath H.N.). The parties settled the dispute amicably and filed a joint memo dated 13.11.2025; the complainant was not interested in prosecuting the complaint; the petitioners and respondent no.2 were present and identified by counsel; the learned HCGP had no objection. Holding: the said proceedings stand quashed and the criminal petition is allowed.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:48141 CRL.P No. 10524 of 2023

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10524 OF 2023

¶7

(482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS))

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

VISMITHA

¶10

W/O H.N.MANJUNATH AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS NO.77, 2^ND MAIN ROAD ARALIMARA ROAD KAMAKSHIPALYA BENGALURU CITY

¶11

SANTHOSH

¶12

Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

S/O LATE RAMAKRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS NO.67, MUNESHWARA TEMPLE ROAD NEAR NEW BALDWIN SCHOOL MUNESHWARA NAGARA BENGALURU CITY.

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SMT. D.R.VIJAYASHRI, ADVOCATE FOR

¶16

SRI. HANUMANTHARAYAPPA K., ADVOCATE)

¶17

AND:

¶18

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶19

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:48141 CRL.P No. 10524 of 2023

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001. GIRI NAGAR POLICE BENGALURU. BY ITS POLICE SUB INSPECTOR.

¶22

MANJUNATH H.N. S/O LATE NAGRAJ AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS 5TH CROSS, COCO GARDEN DWARAKANAGAR BENGALURU-560 063.

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SRI. RAJAT SUBRAMANYAM, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. JAGADEESH C.G., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. B.V.MOHAN ADEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶25

THIS CRL.P. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C.

¶26

PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.7921/2023 IN XXXII ADDITIONAL MAGISTRATE COURT NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 324, 504, 506, 427 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION.

¶27

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶28

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:48141 CRL.P No. 10524 of 2023

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶31

ORAL ORDER

¶32

The present petition has arisen out of a matrimonial dispute between the complainant-husband and accusedwife and her brother. The offences alleged are under Sections 324, 427, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC. It is submitted that the parties have settled their dispute amicably and that the complainant is not interested in prosecuting the complaint against the petitioners herein. In this regard, the parties have filed a joint memo dated 13.11.2025.

¶33

The petitioners and respondent no.2 are present before the Court and they are duly identified by their respective counsel. Together they pray that the proceedings in C.C.No.7921/2023 pending on the file of XXXII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, which was registered pursuant to Crime No.374/2022 by respondent no.1-Police be quashed.

¶34

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:48141 CRL.P No. 10524 of 2023

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

Learned High Court Government Pleader has no

¶37

objection for the same.

¶38

For the aforementioned reasons, the proceedings in C.C.No.7921/2023 which is registered pursuant to crime No.374/2022 pending on the file of XXXII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru stand quashed.

¶39

The criminal petition stands allowed accordingly.

¶40

Sd/(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

¶41

PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4

Vismitha v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vismitha v. 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 Nasrulla Vs Sri Basavaraj Bhandare

Vijay Agarwal @ Vijay Swamy Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Sundari Poojarthi W/O. Angara Poojari Vs Sri Nagappa Poojari S/O. Choova Poojari

Smt. Mubashira Taj Vs State O Karnataka

K P Dilip Kumar Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Poornima G Vs Karnataka Lokayuktha Police