Jobin Jose, Vs the State by Hennur Police Station

JOBIN JOSE, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, S/O SHRI JOSE, RESIDING AT D.G MEDOWS APARTMENT, TF-302, 3^RD FLOOR, NO.89-5, 12TH CROSS, MALLAPPA LAYOUT, GNSM SUPERMARKET, PRAKRUTHI TOWNSHIP, BABUSAPALYA, HORAMAVU, AGARA, BANGALORE 560 043.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI VINCENT P J, ADVOCATE)

¶13

Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K

¶14

Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

AND:

¶16

THE STATE BY HENNUR POLICE STATION, REPRSENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU 560 001.

¶17

PAUL KOLLANOOR ITTOOPUNNY, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, S/O. K.P. ITTOOPUNNY, RESIDING AT NO.003, GROUND FLOOR, 4TH C MAIN, CHIKKABANASWADI, OMBR LAYOUT, BENGALURU CITY,

¶18

2 -

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:33631 CRL.P No. 16340 of 2025

HC-KAR

BENGALURU-560043.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY MS. DEEPTI ALVA, HCGP FOR R-1;

¶24

MS. RENJINI K.S, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

¶25

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) TO QUASH THE FIR LODGED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE AGAINST THE PETITIONER HEREIN IN CR.NO.104/2025 DATED 14.03.2025 (ANNEXURE-A), UNDER SECTION 118(1), 351(2), 351 (3), 352 OF BNS, 2023 AND ALSO READ WITH SECTION 75 OF JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN) ACT, 2015 AND COMPLAINT DATED 13.03.2025 (ANNEXURE-B) PENDING BEFOER XI THE A.C.J.M AT BENGALURU.

¶26

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

¶27

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

Petitioner – accused is before this Court calling in question registration of a crime in Crime No.104/2025, pending before the XI Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Bengaluru, for the offences under Sections 118(1), 351(2), 351(3) and 352 of the BNS and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent No.2 in unison would submit that during the subsistence of

¶31

3 -

¶32

NC: 2026:KHC:33631 CRL.P No. 16340 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

these proceedings, the parties to the lis have entered into settlement amongst themselves by drawing up certain terms and conditions. The parties have filed a joint memo before this Court to that effect.

¶35

3. The joint memo reads as follows:

¶36

“1. The de facto complainant has filed a police complaint against the petitioner/accused before the Hennur Police Station, Bengaluru district on 13.03.2025 and based on the complaint, FIR was registered in Cr No.104/2025 for offences under sections 118(1), 351 (2), 351 (3), 352 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and also read with section 75 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

¶37

We have agreed to co-operate in closing/quashing or withdrawing case against the petitioner in Cr No. 104/2025 pending before XI th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Bengaluru. Both the parties don't have any grievances with each other. Hence the Cr No. 104/2025 has to be compounded as per the terms of joint memo.

¶38

We humbly prayed that offences may be compounded in the interest of justice and equity. This decision is entirely voluntary and free from any coercion or external pressure.

¶39

Hence For the reasons stated above, it is therefore prayed that this Honorable Court may be pleased to quash FIR in Crime No. 104 of 2025 dated 13.03.2025, pending before the Honourable XI th ACJM, Bengaluru, under sections 118(1), 351 (2), 351 (3).352 of Bharatiya Nyava Sanhita. 2023 and also read with section 75 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 in the interest of justice and equity.”

¶40

In the light of the afore-quoted joint memo of the parties,

¶41

I deem it appropriate to terminate the proceedings against the

¶42

4 -

¶43

NC: 2026:KHC:33631 CRL.P No. 16340 of 2025

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

petitioner, as the dispute and the allegations are between the individuals and not against the State.

¶46

For the aforesaid reasons, the following:

¶47

O R D E R

¶48

(a) The criminal petition is disposed.

¶49

(b) The impugned crime in Crime No.104/2025, pending before the XI Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Bengaluru, qua the petitioner, stands quashed.

¶50

Sd/(M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

¶51

NVJ List No.: 3 Sl No.: 58

Jobin Jose, v. the State by Hennur Police Station

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jobin Jose, v. the State by Hennur Police Station

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Syed Tahir Vs Kotak Mahindra Bank

Riya Shankar Mishra Vs the State of Karnataka

Dr a Rajasimha Vs State of Karnataka

Mrs.Kamala Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Salima Vs State of Karnataka by

Vishwas. K, Vs State by