Allowed¶44

Shri Alok Chandrashekhar v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC18 Sept 2025CRL.P/11480/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court (J.M.Khazi J., 18.09.2025), CRL.P No. 11480 of 2023 (482 Cr.P.C / 528 BNSS): quashing of dowry/matrimonial-dispute proceedings (S.498A r/w 34 IPC; Ss.3, 4 Dowry Prohibition Act) in C.C.No.3394/2023 on full settlement between the parties, dissolution of marriage, and payment of Rs.10,00,000 permanent alimony; FIR No.227/2022, complaint dated 01.08.2022, charge-sheet and cognizance order quashed.

What did the court decide?

Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C allowed; FIR No.227/2022, complaint dated 01.08.2022, charge-sheet in C.C.No.3394/2023 and cognizance order dated 17.02.2023 quashed; Registry directed to send a copy of the order to the trial Court forthwith. ¶44

Shri Alok Chandrashekhar Vs State of Karnataka — Dowry and Cruelty | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶44

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal proceeding in C.C.No.3394/2023 (offences punishable under S.498A r/w 34 IPC and Ss.3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act), including the cognizance order dated 17.02.2023, should be quashed.

¶25

Court's answer

Acting on the facts that the parties settled their dispute in Crl.Misc.199/2023 and MC No.662/2022, the marriage between accused No.1 and respondent No.2 stands dissolved, and respondent No.2 admitted receipt of Rs.10,00,000 towards permanent alimony, the Court allowed the petition.

¶37

Ratio / Principle

The petition filed by petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 under Section 482 Cr.P.C is hereby allowed.

¶43

Key takeaways

FIR No.227/2022, the complaint dated 01.08.2022, the charge-sheet in C.C.No.3394/2023 and the cognizance order dated 17.02.2023 in C.C.No.3394/2023 on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore are hereby quashed.ratio¶44

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal petition under S.482 Cr.P.C by accused Nos.1 to 3 seeking quashing of the cognizance order dated 17.02.2023 in C.C.No.3394/2023 (offences punishable under S.498A r/w 34 IPC and Ss.3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act) pending before the A.C.J.M., Bengaluru Rural District, arising out of FIR No.227/2022 of White Field Police Station. The Court recorded that the parties had settled their disputes in Crl.Misc.199/2023 and MC No.662/2022, that the marriage between accused No.1 and respondent No.2 stood dissolved, and that respondent No.2 admitted receipt of Rs.10,00,000 towards permanent alimony. In the light of these facts the petition was allowed: FIR No.227/2022, the complaint dated 01.08.2022, the charge-sheet in C.C.No.3394/2023 and the cognizance order dated 17.02.2023 were quashed, and the Registry was directed to send a copy of the order to the trial Court.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:37468 CRL.P No. 11480 of 2023

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11480 OF 2023 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS))

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SHRI ALOK CHANDRASHEKHAR S/O LATE SURESWAR S.P AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,

¶9

SMT. B.P. PRABHAVATHI W/O LATE SURESWAR S.P AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,

¶10

BOTH R/AT NO. 12/B, 1ST STAGE, INDUSTRIAL SOUTH, VISHVESHWAR LAYOUT, MYSORE SOUTH MYSORE- 570 008.

¶11

Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

SHRI SHASHIKIRAN B.P S/O LATE B.L. PARAMESHWAR, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/A NO. 364, C1, PRESTIGE PALMS, E.C.C ROAD, NEAR G.R. TECH PARK, WHITE FIELD, RAMAGONDANAHALLI, BANGALORE- 560 066.

¶13

…PETITIONERS

¶14

(BY SRI. SHIVASHANKAR S.K.., ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

STATE OF KARNATAKA WHITE FIELD POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS,

¶17

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC:37468 CRL.P No. 11480 of 2023

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

DR AMBEKDAR VEDHI, BANGALORE- 560 001.

¶21

SMT CHANDANA R TIKOTI W/O SHRI ALOK CHANDRASHEKAR, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/A H.NO. 20, 3RD FLOOR, 36TH C CROSS, 19TH MAIN ROAD, 5TH BLOCK, PRAKRUTHI LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560043. WORKING AS COMPANY SECRETARY, DS MAX PROPERTIES PVT LTD NO. 1854, 17TH MAIN, 30TH B CROSS, 5TH BLOCK, HBR LAYOUT, BANGALORE-56004.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI. B.LAKSHMAN, HCGP FOR R1; SMT.KSHAMA NARGUND, ADVOCATE FOR SMT.SENA VAKKUND, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶24

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO

¶25

QUASH THE COGNIZANCE ORDER DATED 17.02.2023 PASSED IN C.C.NO.3394/2023 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A R/W 34 OF IPC AND SEC.3,4 OF D.P ACT PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF THE A.C.J.M BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT BENGALURU AS PER ANNEXURE-M12., AND ETC.

¶26

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

¶27

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI

¶28

¶29

NC: 2025:KHC:37468 CRL.P No. 11480 of 2023

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

ORAL ORDER

¶32

Both learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent No.2 as well as learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1/State are

¶33

present.

¶34

The petitioners and respondent No.2 are

¶35

present.

¶36

It is submitted across the bar that, the present petition is filed challenging the criminal proceeding in C.C No.3394/2023. Since, no stay was pending as against accused No.1, the case is decided on merits and he is acquitted.

¶37

It is also brought to the notice of the Court that, in Crl.Misc.199/2023 and MC No.662/2022, the parties have settled their dispute and the marriage between accused No.1 and respondent No.2 is dissolved. Respondent No.2 admits the receipt of Rs.10,00,000/towards permanent alimony.

¶38

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:37468 CRL.P No. 11480 of 2023

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

In the light of these facts, the petition is

¶41

allowed.

¶42

ORDER

¶43

(i) The petition filed by petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 under Section 482 Cr.P.C, is hereby allowed.

¶44

(ii) The FIR No.227/2022 and complaint dated 01.08.2022, Charge-sheet in C.C No.3394/2023 and cognizance order dated 17.02.2023 in C.C.No.3394/2023 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore are hereby quashed.

¶45

(iii) The Registry is directed to send copy of this order to the trial Court forthwith.

¶46

Sd/(J.M.KHAZI) JUDGE

¶47

KBM

¶48

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31

Shri Alok Chandrashekhar v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Alok Chandrashekhar 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

Tejas @ Kariya Vs State by

Chandrappa. H.Y Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Prashanth, Vs Sri.v. Sridhar Babu v

Syed Mubarak Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Kisar Ahamad Vs State of Karnataka

Shri. Amrit Paul-Ips, Vs State by High Ground P.S.