Shakuntala Vs the State of Karnataka

GIRIJA K., D/O LATE KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCU; HSBC, BANK EMPLOYEE, BANGALORE-560 001. ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.23, BEERESHWARA NILAYA, 3^RD MAIN, CHANNEL ROAD, HALASURU, BENGALURU-560 008.

¶13

…PETITIONERS

¶14

(BY SRI. M.R.C. MANOHAR, ADVOCATE)

¶15

2 -

¶16

NC: 2025:KHC:10926 CRL.P No. 9407 of 2022

¶17

AND:

¶18

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY HALASURU POLICE, REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BANGALORE-560 001.

¶19

SMT. SHILPA N.B., W/O. NATARAJ K., D/O. BASAVARAJAPPA N.S., AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, NO.94/A, GOURISHANKAR, IDEAL HOME TOWNSHIP, RAJARAJESHWARINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 098.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY MS. ASMA KOUSER, ADDL.SPP FOR R1; SRI. MAHESH S., ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶22

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET IN CR.NO.33/2022 REGISTERED BY HALASURU P.S., FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A,313,323,504,506 R/W 34 OF IPC AND SEC.3,4 OF D.P ACT WHICH NUMBERED AS IN C.C.NO.560505/2022 AND PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE XI ACMM, BANGALORE.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶25

3 -

¶26

NC: 2025:KHC:10926 CRL.P No. 9407 of 2022

¶27

ORAL ORDER

¶28

Petitioners have sought to quash the charge sheet filed in Crime No.33/2022 of Halsuru Police Station, Bengaluru City and the consequent proceedings pending in C.C.No.56505/2022 on the file of the Court of XI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Bengaluru.

¶29

It is submitted that the matter has been committed and numbered as S.C.No.2233/2022 on the file of the Court of Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City.

¶30

Charge sheet is filed against accused Nos.1 to 4 for offences punishable under Section 498-A, 313, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Petitioners are arraigned as accused Nos.2 to 4 respectively.

¶31

The matter arises out of a matrimonial dispute, initiated by respondent No.2- W/o. accused No.1, against her husband and in-laws i.e., the petitioners herein.

¶32

Learned counsel appearing for petitioners as well as respondent No.2 has filed a petition under section 482 read

¶33

4 -

¶34

NC: 2025:KHC:10926 CRL.P No. 9407 of 2022

¶35

with Section 320 of Cr.P.C. reporting settlement and seeks to quash the proceedings.

¶36

It is submitted that M.C.No.4577/2023 before the Family Court, Bengaluru has ended in a settlement before the Benglauru Mediation Centre on 11.03.2025 and as per the settlement, petitioners agreed to pay a sum of Rs.28,00,000/(Rupees Twenty Eighty Lakh only) to respondent No.2 / complainant towards permanent alimony / maintenance as full and final settlement. It is submitted that a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- has been paid by way of Demand Draft bearing No.709559 dated 10.03.2025 drawn on State Bank of India, Domlur Branch, Bengaluru and balance of Rs.8,00,000/- has been agreed be paid in this proceeding.

¶37

The parties are present before the Court. Respondent No.2 submits that she has received the Demand Draft for a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- as per the memorandum of settlement entered between them in M.C.No.4577/2023. She submits that in view of the settlement, she is not interested to prosecute her complaint any further.

¶38

5 -

¶39

NC: 2025:KHC:10926 CRL.P No. 9407 of 2022

¶40

8. In B.S. JOSHI AND OTHERS V/S. STATE OF

¶41

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.

¶42

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: i) to secure the ends of justice, or ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. Further held that, 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.

¶43