Smt Rekha N M v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC19 Dec 2025WP/38534/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC (Bengaluru), 19-12-2025, Justice Mohammad Nawaz — WP No. 38534 of 2025 (GM-RES): Smt. Rekha N.M. (adv. Venkatesh Somareddi) v. State of Karnataka/Sanjay Nagar PS (adv. Rahul Rai K., HCGP) & Mr. Abhishek (adv. A. Nancy Prince). Quashing of C.C.No.18315/2023 (FIR Crime No.81/2023 dated 04.09.2025; Ss.341, 354(D), 504 IPC; VIII ACMM Bengaluru) via joint S.528 BNSS 2023 application; affidavits of amicable settlement, voluntary compromise, no coercion; Narinder Singh (2014) 6 SCC 466 relied on (ends of justice / abuse of process); petition allowed, entire proceedings quashed.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; the entire proceedings in C.C.No.18315/2023 pending before the VIII ACMM, Bengaluru are quashed. ¶¶45

Smt Rekha N M Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition allowed; the entire proceedings in C.C.No.18315/2023 pending before the VIII ACMM, Bengaluru are quashed.

¶¶45

Issue for consideration

Whether the proceedings in C.C.No.18315/2023, arising out of FIR in Crime No.81/2023 and pending against the petitioner before the VIII ACMM, Bengaluru, should be quashed in view of the amicable settlement between the petitioner and respondent No.2.

¶¶24

Court's answer

The dispute is private in nature, between the petitioner and respondent No.2, and has now been resolved, the parties having amicably settled the matter.

¶¶35

Ratio / Principle

In the facts and circumstances, no purpose will be served by continuing the proceedings pending against the petitioner.

¶¶38

Key takeaways

Acting on the guiding factors laid down in Narinder Singh ((2014) 6 SCC 466) — securing the ends of justice or preventing abuse of the process of any Court where parties have settled — the Court found it expedient, in order to bring quietus to the entire lis, to quash the proceedings so as to secure the ends of justice.ratio¶¶39

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing of criminal proceedings on amicable settlement — Writ Petition (GM-RES) under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution read with S.528 BNSS 2023 to quash C.C.No.18315/2023 (arising out of FIR Crime No.81/2023 dated 04.09.2025, offences u/Ss.341, 354(D) and 504 IPC) pending before VIII ACMM, Bengaluru — Petitioner and respondent No.2/defacto complainant filed affidavits recording amicable settlement; complainant did not wish to prosecute further, compromise voluntary and free from coercion or undue influence, parties undertook not to interfere in each other's lives — Dispute private in nature and now resolved — Reliance placed on Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466: where parties have reached settlement, guiding factors are to secure the ends of justice or prevent abuse of the process of any Court — No purpose in continuing proceedings; entire proceedings quashed to bring quietus to the lis and secure ends of justice — Petition allowed (Mohammad Nawaz, J.).

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:54592 WP No. 38534 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ WRIT PETITION NO. 38534 OF 2025 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. REKHA N.M. AGED 39 YEARS, D/O MALLESHAIAH, RESIDING AT NO.10/1, BHYRASIDDESHWARA NILAYA, BHOOPASANDRA MAIN ROAD, NAGASHETTYHALLI, BENGALURU-560 094.

¶9

&PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. VENKATESH SOMAREDDI, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SANJAY NAGAR POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶14

MR. ABHISHEK AGED 35 YEARS, S/O LATE BASAVARAJU, R/AT NO.60, 2^ND CROSS, UAS LAYOUT, BHOOPASANDRA, SANJAY NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 094.

¶15

&RESPONDENTS

¶16

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:54592 WP No. 38534 of 2025

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

(BY SRI. RAHUL RAI K., HCGP FOR R1; SMT. A. NANCY PRINCE, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶20

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 528 OF BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023, PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.18315/2023 ARISING OUT OF FIR IN CRIME NO.81/2023 DATED 04.09.2025 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 SANJAY NAGAR POLICE FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SEC. 341, 354(D) AND 504 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF VIII ACMM, BANGALORE VIDE ANNEXURE-D, IN SO FAR AS THE RESPONDENT NO.2 IS CONCERNED.

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

Petitioner is seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.18315/2023 arising out of FIR in Crime No.81/2023 registered at Sanjay Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru City, pending on the file of VIII ACMM, Bengaluru.

¶25

¶26

NC: 2025:KHC:54592 WP No. 38534 of 2025

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

FIR is registered on a complaint lodged by respondent No.2, for the offence punishable under Section 341, 354(D), 504 of IPC. On completion of investigation, chargesheet has been filed against the petitioner.

¶29

An application is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 by the learned counsel appearing for parties, to permit them to compromise the dispute and to quash the proceedings. Petitioner and respondent No.2/defacto complainant have filed affidavits, wherein it is stated that they have amicably settled the dispute and sought to permit them to compound the offence.

¶30

Respondent No.2 has stated that she wish to

¶31

lead a peaceful life by burying the hatchet. Hence, she do not wish to prosecute the case any more. She has further stated that the compromise is entered by her voluntarily and there is no coercion or undue influence whatsoever. In the affidavits, the parties have undertaken not to interfere the lives of each other.

¶32

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:54592 WP No. 38534 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

Perusal of the complaint averments goes to

¶35

show that dispute is private in nature, between the petitioner and respondent No.2. The said dispute has been now resolved and the parties have amicably settled the matter.

¶36

The Hon9ble Apex Court in Narinder Singh and

¶37

Others V. State of Punjab and Another 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.

¶38

In the facts and circumstances, no purpose will

¶39

be served by continuing the proceedings pending against the petitioner. In order to bring quietus to the entire lis, it is expedient to quash the proceedings, to secure the ends of justice. Accordingly, the following:

¶40