Allowed¶48

Ravi Chandran J v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC1 Dec 2025CRL.P/15467/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC (Justice Mohammad Nawaz, 01.12.2025) in CRL.P No.15467/2025 quashed matrimonial-dispute criminal case C.C.No.31198/2022 (Crime No.271/2021, Subramanyapura PS; S.498A, 420 r/w 34 IPC; Ss.3 & 4 Dowry Prohibition Act) against accused Nos.1-3 under S.482 CrPC (filed u/S 528 BNNS) after mutual-consent divorce decree dated 13.01.2025 (M.C.No.7911/2024, Family Court Bengaluru) and payment of Rs.7,00,000/- settlement draft to the wife/defacto complainant, who consented; joint affidavit of parties; quashing on compromise in matrimonial dispute.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; IA No.2/2025 allowed; entire proceedings in C.C.No.31198/2022 (Crime No.271/2021, Subramanyapura Police Station) against accused Nos.1 to 3 quashed; IA No.1/2025 disposed of. ¶48

Ravi Chandran J Vs the State of Karnataka — Maintenance and Alimony | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition allowed; IA No.2/2025 allowed; entire proceedings in C.C.No.31198/2022 (Crime No.271/2021, Subramanyapura Police Station) against accused Nos.1 to 3 quashed; IA No.1/2025 disposed of.

¶48

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal proceedings in C.C.No.31198/2022 against the petitioner and other accused, arising out of a matrimonial dispute, should be quashed in view of the compromise/settlement arrived at between the petitioner and respondent No.2.

¶29

Court's answer

In view of the compromise between the parties and the joint affidavit filed, no useful purpose will be served in continuing the criminal proceedings pending against all the accused; hence, in the interest of justice, it is desirable to quash the entire proceedings.

¶45

Ratio / Principle

The entire proceedings arising out of Crime No.271/2021 of Subramanyapura Police Station, pending before the 30th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Bengaluru in C.C.No.31198/2022, as against accused Nos.1 to 3, for offences under Sections 498A, 420 r/w 34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, are quashed.

¶48

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal petition under S.482 Cr.PC (filed u/S 528 BNNS) by the husband seeking quashing of proceedings in C.C.No.31198/2022 (arising out of Crime No.271/2021, Subramanyapura Police Station) against him and two others for offences under Sections 498A, 420 r/w 34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Parties had settled their matrimonial dispute: divorce by mutual consent granted on 13.01.2025 in M.C.No.7911/2024 (Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru), and petitioner paid Rs.7,00,000/- (Demand Draft No.491006 dated 01.12.2025, Canara Bank, Uttarahally Branch) to respondent No.2 towards maintenance, education and other expenses of the minor child per the memorandum of settlement. Joint application and affidavit filed; respondent No.2/defacto complainant present, identified by counsel, and stated she had no objection to quashing. Court held that, in view of the compromise and joint affidavit, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the criminal proceedings and quashed the entire proceedings against accused Nos.1 to 3. IA No.2/2025 allowed; IA No.1/2025 disposed of.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:49937 CRL.P No. 15467 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO.15467 OF 2025

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

RAVI CHANDRAN J., S/O G.JAYA KUMAR AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.52, 4^TH CROSS VALLABHANAGAR, UTTARAHALLI SUBRAMANYAPURA BENGALURU - 560 061.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI AJAY SPHAN PINTO, ADVOCATE FOR SRI SUDHANVA D. S., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SUBRAMANYAPURA POLICE REPRESENTED BY H.C.G.P BENGALURU - 560 009.

¶14

S.B.PRIYADHARSHINI W/O RAVICHANDRAN D/O BALASUBRAMANIAN AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NO.35/1, 1^ST MAIN ROAD HANUMANTHAPURA, SRIRAMPURA BENGALURU - 560 021. RESPONDENTS ADDRESS AS PER CHARGESHEET

¶15

¶16

NC: 2025:KHC:49937 CRL.P No. 15467 of 2025

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

NO:09, OLD NO:04, DR. RAMESH NIVAS 2^ND FLOOR, 2^ND CROSS, SRIRAMPURA BENGALURU, KARNATAKA - 560 021.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI ANOOP KUMAR M. V., HCGP FOR R1; SMT. PUSHPALATHA Y., ADVOCATE FOR SRI KASHINATH J. D., ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶21

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN C.C.NO.31198/2022 ARISING OUT IN CR.NO.271/2022 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A R/W 34 OF IPC PENDING BEFORE THE XXX A.C.J.M AT BENGALURU IN CRL.MISC.NO.156/2023 UNDER SEC.125 OF CR.PC PENDING BEFORE THE I ADDL.FAMILY JUGDE, BENGALURU AND M.C.CNO.7911/2024 UNDER SEC.13B OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT FILED BEFORE THE PRL.JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT BENGALURU.

¶22

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

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

Petitioner is seeking to quash the proceedings initiated by respondent No.2, pending in C.C.No.31198/2022 on the file of the Court of 30^th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru, for the offence punishable under Section 498A, 420 R/W 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶26

¶27

NC: 2025:KHC:49937 CRL.P No. 15467 of 2025

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

An application is filed signed by the petitioner and respondent No. 2, seeking to quash the proceedings, in view of the compromise arrived between them. The application is supported by the joint affidavit of the parties.

¶30

It is stated that a petition was filed under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking dissolution of the marriage on mutual consent, in M.C.No.7911/2024 before the Principal Judge, Family Court at Bengaluru and the Court has granted a decree of divorce on 13.01.2025 as per the terms of the settlement entered between the parties. Further, as per the memorandum of settlement, petitioner has to pay a sum of ₹ 7,00,000/- to respondent No. 2 towards her maintenance, education and other expenses of the minor child, on or before 31.12.2025.

¶31

The petitioner and respondent No.2 are present before the Court, they are identified by their respective learned counsel.

¶32

Petitioner has handed over a Demand Draft bearing No.491006 dated 01.12.2025 drawn on Canara Bank,

¶33

¶34

NC: 2025:KHC:49937 CRL.P No. 15467 of 2025

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

Uttarahally Branch, Bengaluru, in the name of second respondent, for a sum of ₹ 7,00,000./-.

¶37

The receipt of the Demand Draft has been acknowledged by the second respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the said respondent.

¶38

Matter arises out of a matrimonial dispute, wherein the parties have settled the dispute and by virtue of the mutual consent petition filed before the Family Court, Bengaluru, the marriage between petitioner and respondent No.2 has been dissolved. In terms of the settlement, petitioner has paid a sum of ₹ 7,00,000/- to respondent No.2.

¶39

Respondent No.2/defacto complainant present before the Court and submits that in view of the settlement, she is not interested in proceeding with the case any further and she has no objection to quash the entire proceedings now pending before the trial Court.

¶40

In this case, FIR is registered against the petitioner and two others i.e. petitioner and in-laws of respondent No.2. On completion of investigation charge sheet has been filed.

¶41

¶42

NC: 2025:KHC:49937 CRL.P No. 15467 of 2025

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

In view of the compromise between the parties and

¶45

the joint affidavit filed, no useful purpose will be served in continuing the criminal proceedings pending against all the accused. Hence, in the interest of justice, it is desirable to quash the entire proceedings. Accordingly, the following

¶46

ORDER

¶47

IA No.2/2025 is allowed. Consequently, petition is allowed .

¶48

The entire proceedings arising out of Crime No.271/2021 of Subramanyapura Police Station, pending before the 30^th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Bengaluru, in C.C.No. 31198/2022, as against accused No.1 to 3, for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 420 r/w 34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act are quashed.

¶49

IA No.1/2025 is disposed of.

¶50

Sd/(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE

¶51

AP, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 60

Ravi Chandran J v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi Chandran J 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

Yesu Krishna Vs the State of Karnataka

Abhishek Shriyan Vs State by S H O

Smt Chandra Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Hemanth S Reddy Vs State of Karnataka

Shihabuddin Vs the State of Karnataka

Eashan Shetty Vs the State