Disposed¶43

Smt. Veena W/O Shrinivas Dyavanur D/O Nagappa Shiro v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC8 Jan 2026CRL.P/104396/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRL.P No. 104396 of 2025; High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench; V. Srishananda J.; decided 08-01-2026; quashing of criminal proceedings; Section 67 Information Technology Act, 2008; non-compoundable offence; S.482 Cr.P.C.; S.528 BNSS; Section 320 Cr.P.C.; Section 359 BNSS; voluntary compromise; matrimonial dispute between husband and wife; settlement of misunderstanding; Ramgopal and another v. State of Madhyapradesh (2022) 14 SCC 531; FIR Crime No.72/2024 Gadag Cen Crime Police Station; C.C.No.72/2025 I Addl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC-I Gadag; petition disposed.

What did the court decide?

Pending proceedings in Crime No.72/2024 on the file of I Addl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and J.M.F.C., Gadag stand quashed with respect to the petitioner; the petition is disposed of. ¶43

Smt. Veena W/O Shrinivas Dyavanur D/O Nagappa Shiro Vs the State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Pending proceedings in Crime No.72/2024 on the file of I Addl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and J.M.F.C., Gadag stand quashed with respect to the petitioner; the petition is disposed of.

¶43

Issue for consideration

Whether the pending criminal proceedings in Crime No.72/2024 for the offence under Section 67 of the IT Act, being a non-compoundable offence, ought to be quashed in exercise of the Court's inherent power (S.482 Cr.P.C. / S.528 BNSS) in view of the true settlement between the parties. +1 more

¶28

Court's answer

The offence under Section 67 of the IT Act is a non-compoundable offence, and therefore the parties approached the Court for quashing of the criminal complaint in view of the true settlement.

¶28

Ratio / Principle

Since the compromise is voluntary and without any influence or coercion, the pending criminal proceedings need to be quashed by exercising the powers vested in this Court under Section 528 BNSS, following the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Ramgopal and another v. State of Madhyapradesh, (2022) 14 SCC 531.

¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Karnataka High Court, Dharwad Bench (V. Srishananda, J.), Criminal Petition No. 104396 of 2025 under S.482 Cr.P.C. / S.528 BNSS, decided 08-01-2026: The petitioner-wife sought quashing of the entire proceedings in C.C.No.72/2025, arising out of FIR Crime No.72/2024 registered by Gadag Cen Crime Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2008, pending before the I Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC-I, Gadag. The parties informed the Court that a complaint lodged on account of matrimonial misunderstanding had been sorted out and that they wished to live happily as husband and wife. Noting that the offence under Section 67 of the IT Act is non-compoundable, and finding the compromise voluntary and without influence or coercion, the Court exercised its inherent power under Section 528 BNSS, following the Apex Court dictum in Ramgopal and another v. State of Madhyapradesh, (2022) 14 SCC 531, and quashed the pending proceedings; the petition stood disposed of.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC-D:180 CRL.P No. 104396 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 104396 OF 2025

¶8

(482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS))

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SMT. VEENA W/O SHRINIVAS DYAVANUR, D/O NAGAPPA SHIROL, AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC. HOME MAKER, R/O. DUNDURU, KALMESHWAR TEMPLE, DUNDURU-582205, DIST: GADAG.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SMT.PADMAJA S. TADPATRI, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH GADAG CEN CRIME P.S. GADAG, NOW REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH AT DHARWAD.

¶16

SHRINIVAS S/O HANAMAPPA DYAVANUR, AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC. FARMER/POLITICIAN, R/O. DUNDUR-582205, TQ. AND DIST. GADAG.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. B.G. INDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S. 482 OF CR.P.C. (U/S. 528 OF BNS 2023) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.72/2025 PENDING ON THE FILE OF I

¶19

2 - NC: 2026:KHC-D:180 CRL.P No. 104396 of 2025

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC-I, GADAG ARISING OUT OF FIR CRIME NO.72/2024 REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 67 OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2008 REGISTERED BY GADAG CEN CRIME POLICE STATION GADAG., WITH RESPECT TO THE PETITIONER AND ETC.

¶22

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

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA)

¶25

Parties present with their respective counsels.

¶26

The present petition is filed to quash the pending criminal proceedings in Crime No.72/2024 for the offences punishable under Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2008 (for short, ‘IT Act’).

¶27

Parties submit that on account of some misunderstanding, a complaint came to be lodged. Now the parties have sorted out the misunderstanding and they want to live happily as husband and wife in future.

¶28

The offence under Section 67 of the IT Act is non-compoundable offence and therefore, they have

¶29

3 - NC: 2026:KHC-D:180 CRL.P No. 104396 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

approached this Court for quashing the criminal complaint in view of the true settlement.

¶32

On enquiry, parties agree that they have

¶33

retraced their steps and sorted out the misunderstanding and would like to lead a happy married life in future.

¶34

Since the compromise is voluntary and without any influence or coercion, this Court is of the considered opinion that the pending criminal proceedings needs to be quashed by exercising the powers vested in this Court under Section 528 BNSS by following the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ramgopal and another

¶35

v. State of Madhyapradesh reported in (2022) 14 SCC 531.

¶36

Hence, the following order is passed.

¶37

ORDER

¶38

i. Petition is disposed of.

¶39

ii. Placing the application filed under Section 482 r/w Section 320 Cr.P.C. and also

¶40

¶41

NC: 2026:KHC-D:180 CRL.P No. 104396 of 2025

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

under Section 528 r/w Section 359 BNSS, the pending proceedings in Crime No.72/2024 on the file of I Addl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and J.M.F.C., Gadag stands hereby quashed.

¶44

Sd/(V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE

¶45

CLK CT-CMU LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 38

Smt. Veena W/O Shrinivas Dyavanur D/O Nagappa Shiro v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Veena W/O Shrinivas Dyavanur D/O Nagappa Shiro 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

Prashantagouda S/O Rachanagouda Neelappa Goudar Vs the State of Karnataka

Tajuddin Abdul Khadar Shet Vs the State of Karnataka

Vishwanath Khandelwal Vs the State of Karnataka

Ravi Aliyas Bhayjan S/O Navalsingh Sengar Vs the State of Karnataka

Praveen Kumar S/O Yallappa Rathod Vs the State of Karnataka

Chidanand S/O. Suresh Hullolli Alias Hallolli Vs State of Karnataka