Kuberguptha P R Vs the State of Karnataka

KUBERGUPTHA. P. R. S/O P. C. REDDAPASHETTY NOW AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/AT NO.10/82,12TH A CROSS, NEW YELLAMMA TEMPLE ROAD, SRINIVASANAGARA, BENGALURU-560050.

¶13

…PETITIONER

¶14

(BY SRI. B.V.MANJE GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.CHANDRASHEKARA K A., ADVOCATE)

¶15

Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶16

AND:

¶17

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE POLICE OF SOUTH WOMEN POLICE STATION, BENGALURU-560004.

¶18

REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU-570001.

¶19

SMT. B. K. POORNIMA W/O P. R. KUBERGUPTA., AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS

¶20

2 -

¶21

NC: 2025:KHC:54589 CRL.P No. 5594 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 3633 of 2025

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

NO.506, 4^TH CROSS, SANTHOSHNAGARA, PIPELINE ROAD, NEAR AYYAPPA SCHOOL, T. DASARAHALLI, BENGALURU-560057.

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI. ANOOP KUMAR M.V, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. ARUNA Y M, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶26

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE REGISTRATION OF FIR IN CR.NO.6/2025 OF SOUTH WOMEN P.S. BENGALURU CITY NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED 37TH ADDL.C.M.M COURT BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 85,115(2),352,351(2),351(3) R/W 3(5) OF BNS AND SEC.3,4 OF D. P ACT IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONERS HEREIN IS CONCERNED.

¶27

IN CRL.P NO. 3633/2025

¶28

BETWEEN:

¶29

SMT. GEETHA RANI W/O P. C. REDDAPPASETTY NOW AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/AT NO.129/A, LONG BAZAR, VENKATAGIRIKOTA, CHITTOR, ANDRA PRADESH-517424.

¶30

P. C. REDDAPPASETTY S/O.CHANDRAIAH SETTY, NOW AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, R/AT NO.129/A, LONG BAZAR, VENKATAGIRIKOTA, CHITTOR, ANDRA PRADESH-517424.

¶31

...PETITIONERS

¶32

(BY SRI. B.V.MANJE GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.CHANDRASHEKARA K A., ADVOCATE)

¶33

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:54589 CRL.P No. 5594 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 3633 of 2025

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

AND:

¶36

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE POLICE OF SOUTH WOMEN POLICE STATION, BENGALURU-560004. REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU-570001.

¶37

SMT. B. K.POORNIMA W/O P.R.KUBERGUPTA., AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS NO.506, 4^TH CROSS, SANTHOSHNAGARA, PIPELINE ROAD, NEAR AYYAPPA SCHOOL, T.DASARAHALLI, BENGALURU-560057.

¶38

...RESPONDENTS

¶39

(BY SRI. ANOOP KUMAR M. V, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. ARUNA Y M, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶40

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE REGISTRATION OF FIR IN CR.NO.06/2025 OF SOUTH WOMEN POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED 37TH ADDL. CMM COURT, BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 85, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3) R/W 3(5) OF BNS AND 3 AND 4 OF D.P. ACT, IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONERS HEREIN IS CONCERNED.

¶41

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

¶42

4 -

¶43

NC: 2025:KHC:54589 CRL.P No. 5594 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 3633 of 2025

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶46

ORAL ORDER

¶47

Petitioners in both the petitions are seeking to quash the registration of FIR in Crime No.6/2025 at South Women Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offence Punishable under Section 85, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

¶48

FIR is registered on a complaint lodged by the second respondent. The matter arises out of a matrimonial dispute, wherein, it is submitted that the parties have resolved the entire dispute and on that ground, they are seeking to quash the proceedings.

¶49

Petitioners and respondent No. 2/ defacto complainant are present before the Court. Applications are filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. / 528 of the BNSS, 2023 in both petitions to permit the parties to compound the

¶50

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:54589 CRL.P No. 5594 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 3633 of 2025

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

offence and to quash the entire proceedings. Applications

¶53

are accompanied by affidavits of the parties concerned.

¶54

It is stated that in M.C.No.7816/2024, the

¶55

Family Court, Begnaluru has granted a decree of divorce in terms of the memorandum of settlement filed in the said case. A copy of the order passed therein and the memorandum of settlement are enclosed with the application.

¶56

Respondent No.2 / defacto complainant submits

¶57

that in view of the settlement, she does not wish to proceed with the complaint and she has no objection to quash the FIR and the entire proceedings.

¶58

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Jitendra Raghuvanshi and others v. Babita Raghuvanshi and another reported in 2013(2) Crimes 90(SC), has held that ‘the inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., are wide and unfettered. It is the duty of the Courts to encourage

¶59

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:54589 CRL.P No. 5594 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 3633 of 2025

¶60

HC-KAR

¶61

genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes, particularly, when the same are on considerable increase. Even if the offences are non-compoundable, if they relate to matrimonial disputes and the Court is satisfied that, the parties have settled the same amicably and without any pressure, for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, Section 320 of the Code, would not be a bar to the exercise of power of quashing of FIR.’

¶62

Learned counsel for petitioner submit that in terms of settlement, petitioners are handing over a Demand Draft bearing No.620631 dated 29.11.2025 for a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- drawn on Union Bank, Bengaluru in favour of respondent No.2. Receipt of the same has been acknowledged by the second respondent.

¶63

The matter arises out of matrimonial dispute, where, the parties have resolved the entire dispute. The Family Court has granted a decree of divorce in terms of the memorandum of settlement filed by the parties.

¶64

7 -

¶65

NC: 2025:KHC:54589 CRL.P No. 5594 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 3633 of 2025

¶66

HC-KAR

¶67

In the above facts and circumstances, no

¶68

purpose will be served in continuing the proceedings initiated against the petitioners. In the interest of justice, it is just and proper to quash the proceedings. Accordingly, the following:-

¶69

ORDER

¶70

i) Applications are allowed, consequently,

¶71

petitions are allowed .

¶72

ii) The entire proceedings / investigation in Crime No.6/2025 of South Women Police Station, Bengaluru City and the consequential proceedings before the XXXVII ACMM Court, Bengaluru City are quashed .

¶73

Sd/(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE

¶74

LDC List No.: 2 Sl No.: 11

Kuberguptha P R v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuberguptha P R 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Parashurama Hanuma Gowda Vs State of Karnataka

Ganesh Raikar Vs the State of Karnataka by

Mrs Kaueer Rafiq Vs State of Karnataka

Thaseen Nawaz Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr. Peyush Bansal Vs State of Karnataka

Srinivas @ Seena @ Canter @ Chappa Vs State of Karnataka