Sri. Manjunath M Vs State of Karnataka

SMT. BHRAMARAMBIKA S W/O MANJUNATH M AGED 38 YEARS, R/A NO.822/7, BASAVESHWARA NILAYA, BASAWESHWARANAGAR, SHIVANAHALLI, JAKKUR ROAD, YELAHANKA, BENGALURU-560 064.

¶28

…RESPONDENTS

¶29

(BY SRI. RAJAT SUBRAHMANYA, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. SHRIDHARA K., ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

¶30

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC PRAYING TO 1) SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 02.06.2023 PASSED BY THE XXXVII ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE IN C.C.NO.12091/2023 TAKING COGNIZANCE OF THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 498A, 323, 504, 506 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC, R/W 3 AND 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT. 2) QUASH THE ENTIRE CHARGE SHEET IN C.C.NO.12091/2023, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE XXXVII

¶31

3 -

¶32

NC: 2025:KHC:9576 CRL.P No. 7210 of 2023

¶33

ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 498A, 323, 504, 506 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC, R/W 3 AND 4 OF DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT.

¶34

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

¶35

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶36

ORAL ORDER

¶37

This petition is preferred with the following prayer:

¶38

a) Set aside the order dated 02-06-2023 passed by the Hon'ble XXXVII Addl Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore in CC No. 12091/2023 taking cognizance of the offences punishable under section 498(A), 323, 504, 506 R/w section 34 of IPC, R/w 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶39

b) Quash the entire charge sheet in CC No. 12091/2023, pending on the file of the Hon'ble XXXVII Addl Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore for the offence punishable under section 498(A), 323, 504, 506 R/w section 34 of IPC, R/w 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶40

c) Pass such other orders or directions as this Hon'ble court deem it fit and proper in the fact and

¶41

4 -

¶42

NC: 2025:KHC:9576 CRL.P No. 7210 of 2023

¶43

circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.

¶44

Petitioners are accused No. 1 to 7 respectively in

¶45

Crime No.49/2023 of Yelahanka Police Station, Bengaluru City, registered for offences punishable under Section 498-A, 504, 506, 323, 324, 354 of IPC and Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶46

Complainant / respondent No.2, Bhramarabmika W/o . petitioner No.1 filed a private complaint before the learned Magistrate against the petitioners herein namely her husband and in-laws, alleging the above offences. The said complaint was referred to police for investigation and consequently, aforementioned crime was registered. The police

¶47

have filed charge sheet against the petitioners. The case is pending in C.C.No.12091/2023 on the file of the Court of XXXVII ACMM, Bengaluru.

¶48

Learned counsel for the petitioners has filed a memo along with final order dated 26.07.2023 passed in M.C.No.946/2022 by the V Additional Family Judge dissolving the marriage of respondent No.2 and petitioner No.1. Along with memo, mediation report is also enclosed wherein,

¶49

5 -

¶50

NC: 2025:KHC:9576 CRL.P No. 7210 of 2023

¶51

respondent No.2 has agreed to withdraw the proceedings under challenge. Para No.12 of the memorandum of settlement is extracted here under:

¶52

The petitioner and the respondent shall cooperate and take all possible necessary steps before the Honorable High Court of Karnataka to quash the proceeding CC.No.12091/2023 for the offences punishable under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC, r/w 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, which is pending before the Honorable XXXVII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore.

¶53

The matter arises out of a matrimonial dispute. The marriage between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 has been dissolved by virtue of the order passed by the Family Court, Bengaluru in M.C.No.946/2022. In terms of the memorandum of settlement, respondent No.2 herein has agreed to take all possible steps to quash the proceedings pending against the petitioners. Hence, no purpose will be served in keeping the proceedings pending before the Trial Court.

¶54

6 -

¶55

NC: 2025:KHC:9576 CRL.P No. 7210 of 2023

¶56

In B.S. JOSHI AND OTHERS V/S. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that it becomes the duty of the Court to encourage the genuine settlement of matrimonial dispute and in exercise of its inherent power, High Court can quash criminal proceedings and Section 320 of the code does not limit or affect the powers under section 482 of Cr.P.C.

¶57

The Hon'ble Apex Court in NARIDER SINGH AND OTHERS reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466 has held that when the parties have reached the settlement, and on that basis, petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure: i) ends of justice, or ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. Criminal cases having overwhelming and predominantly civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transaction or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family dispute should be quashed when parties have resolved their entire dispute among themselves.

¶58

In the light of the above decision and in view of the settlement between the parties, proceedings before the Trial deserves to be quashed. Accordingly, the following:-

¶59