Praveen Manohar Kutino Vs the State of Karnataka

PRAVEEN MANOHAR KUTINO S/O VELRIYAN KUTINO AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC: CONTRACTOR, R/AT NO.-2-165, TODARU PALKEY HOUSE, TODARU VILLAGE AND POST, MOODABIDRE, MANGALORE TALUK - 574 227.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI DINESHKUMAR RAO K., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE Digitally signed MOODABIDRE POLICE STATION, by ANUSHA V MANGALORE-574 227 Location: High (REP BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Court of HIGH COURT BUILDING Karnataka BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶15

MARIA GRETA PINTO D/O WILFRED KUTINO AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/O AT MARVIL VILLA BAREBAILU MANE, HOSABETTU VILLAGE AND POST, MOODABIDRE, MANGALORE TALUK - 574 227.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SMT.SOWMYA R., HCGP FOR R1; SRI N.M.BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶18

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:32978 CRL.P No. 4914 of 2019

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN C.C.NO.235/2019 (CHARGE SHEETED FOR THE OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS 504,324 OF IPC) PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MOODBIDRI.

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

Challenging proceedings in CC no.235/2019 on file of Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Moodbidri for offences punishable under Sections 504 and 324 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 ( IPC ), this petition is filed.

¶25

Sri Dineshkumar Rao K., learned counsel for petitioner as well as S ri N.M. Bhat, learned counsel for respondent no.2 submit that during pendency of petition, parties i.e. petitioner and respondent no.2 - complainant have settled their dispute and an application under Section 320 (2) and (8) read with Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( CrPC ) is filed for compounding.

¶26

3 -

¶27

NC: 2026:KHC:32978 CRL.P No. 4914 of 2019

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

3. Terms of application reads as under:

¶30

" APPLICATION UNDER SECTIONS 320(2) AND (8) R/W 482 of CR.P.C,FOR COMPOUNDING.

¶31

The Petitioner most humbly submit as follows:

¶32

1. That on a complaint filed by one Smt. Maria gratta pinto, respondent no.2 on 15/11/2018, the PSI of Moodabidre Police Station, Mangaluru, registered a case in Crime.No.358/2018 for offence punishable under Sections 504, 324, 354 of IPC against petitioner.

¶33

2. It is humbly submitted by Petitioner is nowhere concerned to the alleged incident and petitioner deny the entire case of prosecution. Further complainant/ respondent no.2 submits that she has no grievance against petitioner and as such she does not intend to proceed with the case as against petitioner and they have no dispute between themselves and they have settled their dispute amicably.

¶34

3. It is submitted that in the facts and circumstances, the Respondent no. 2 does not intend to proceed with the case against the Petitioner and she voluntarily without any undue influence as decided not to proceed with criminal case against the Petitioner. That in view of the facts and circumstances Respondent no. 2 does not intend to proceed with the Criminal case and prays that this Hon'ble High Court may be pleased to permit the parties to compound and quash the proceedings as against Petitioner.

¶35

Prayer

¶36

It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble High Court may be pleased to permit Petitioner and Respondent no.2 to compound the offences and quash the Criminal Proceedings against the Petitioner in CC.No.235/2019, pending on the file of Civil Judge and JMFC Moodbidri., (registered for offence punishable under sections 504, 324, 354 of IPC, in the interest of justice."

¶37

4 -

¶38

NC: 2026:KHC:32978 CRL.P No. 4914 of 2019

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

Parties are present and are identified by their

¶41

respective counsel.

¶42

And on interaction, respondent no.2 - complainant

¶43

has affirmed contents of application and joint affidavit is filed, which reads as follows:

¶44

" JOINT AFFIDAVIT

¶45

HEREIN WE, Praveen Manohar Kutino S/o Velriyan Kuutinoh, aged about 46 years, Occ: Contractor, R/at No-2-165, Todaru palkey house, todaru village and post, Moodabidre, Mangalore taluk-574227 and Maria greta pinto, D/o Vilfred Kuttinoh, agef about 36years, R/at Mervil villa, barebailu mane, Hosabettu village and post, Moodbidre, Mangalore taluk-574227, today at Bengaluru, do hereby state on solemnly affirmation on oath state as follows.

¶46

1. That we are the respondent no.2 and petitioner in the above Criminal petition and we know the facts of the case, Hence, we are swearing to this affidavit.

¶47

2. We state that the contents in the accompanying application of compromise/ compounding of offence at Para 1 to 3 are true and correct to the best of our knowledge, belief and information and we believe them to be true and correct.

¶48

This is our name and signature and contents stated above are true to the best of our knowledge, information and belief and our believe them to be true and correct."

¶49

It is seen that this petition is filed challenging entire proceedings in CC no.235/2019 pending on file of Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Moodbidri for offences punishable under Sections 504 and 324 of IPC. Perusal of charge sheet reveals

¶50

5 -

¶51

NC: 2026:KHC:32978 CRL.P No. 4914 of 2019

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

that incident arose out of civil transaction between parties and is purely inter-parte .

¶54

Counsel for parties submitted that there were no serious injuries and complaint was filed in spur of moment and subsequently parties have agreed to settle their dispute and give quietus to proceedings.

¶55

Since incident does not have societal implication and appears to be purely inter-parte and since parties have agreed to settle dispute, possibility of conviction in matter would be bleak and continuation of prosecution would be futile. Therefore, not only on ground of preventing abuse of process of Court but also to secure ends of justice, petition is allowed , proceedings i n CC no.235/2019 on file of Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Moodbidri for offences punishable under Sections 504 and 324 of IPC stand quashed .

¶56

Sd/(RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE

¶57

GRD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25

Praveen Manohar Kutino v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Praveen Manohar Kutino 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr Niranjan Kumar C Vs State of Karnataka

Ninganna Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Sanjay C Paul Vs Smt Sunitha M

Mr Nazim Noor Mohammed Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Ravikumar Vs the State-through the

B S Sharada Vs State of Karnataka