Disposed¶51

Smt. Shahanaz Begum v. R.T Nagar Police Station

Karnataka HC26 Mar 2026CRL.P/6877/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of criminal proceedings on settlement between parties; joint memo and affidavit; mediation; Rs. 15,00,000 paid by demand drafts; S.498A IPC; Sections 3 & 4 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act; Protection of Muslim Women Act (SEC.34 / Section 3 & 4 Column 4); FIR Crime No.218/2019, R.T. Nagar Police Station dated 14.10.2019; charge sheet C.C.No.1476/2021, 32nd Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru; CRL.P No. 6877 of 2023; S.482 Cr.P.C / S.528 BNSS; High Court of Karnataka; Justice M. Nagaprasanna; decided 26.03.2026; petition disposed; proceedings quashed qua petitioners.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in C.C.No.1476/2021 pending before the 32nd Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, quashed qua the petitioners; criminal petition disposed. ¶51

Smt. Shahanaz Begum Vs R.T Nagar Police Station — Domestic Violence | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:17358 CRL.P No. 6877 of 2023

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6877 OF 2023 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS))

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. SHAHANAZ BEGUM W/O LATE SYED KALEEMULLA, AGE ABOUT 71 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 335, KURUBURPETE, MULBAGAL, KARNATAKA- 563131

¶9

SMT PARVEEN BANU W/O. KHAZI SIRAJ AHAMED D/O LATE SYED KALEEMULLA, AGE ABOUT 59 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO 335, KURUBURPETE, MULBAGAL, KARNATAKA- 563131

¶10

…PETITIONERS

¶11

Digitally signed by SANJEEVINI J KARISHETTY Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

(BY SRI. NAVEED AHMED., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

R.T NAGAR POLICE STATION REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE - 01

¶15

SMT SYEEDA BANU W/O SYED MUKAMIL, D/O MOHAMMED UMER, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R/AT NO 27/6, 3RD MAIN,

¶16

5TH CROSS RAHMATHNAGAR,

¶17

¶18

NC: 2026:KHC:17358 CRL.P No. 6877 of 2023

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

R T NAGAR POST BANGALORE- 32

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. CHANNAPPA EARAPPA, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. HASANASAB S MAGADI., ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶23

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET IN C.C.NO.1476/2021 IN THE FILE OF 32nd A.C.M.M, BENGALURU REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A OF IPC, SEC.3 AND 4 OF D.V ACT AND SEC.34 OF THE PROTECTION OF MUSLIM WOMEN ACT VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE FIR AND COMPLAINT IN CR.NO.218/2019, R.T. NAGAR P.S., DATED 14.10.2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND C RESPECTIVELY.

¶24

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

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

The petitioners are before this court seeking the following

¶28

relief:

¶29

a) Quash the Charge sheet in C.C.No.1476/2021 on the file of 32^nd Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore registered by the respondent R.T.Nagar Police for the offences punishable under Section 498A of IPC, Section 3 and 4 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act and Section 3 & 4 Column 4 of the Protection of Muslim Woman Act vide Annexure-A and Consequently quash the FIR and Complaint in Crime No.218/2019, R.T.Nagar Police Station dated 14.10.2019 vide Annexure-B and C respectively.

¶30

b) Pass any other Order/Orders or issue any Direction/Direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in

¶31

¶32

NC: 2026:KHC:17358 CRL.P No. 6877 of 2023

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity."

¶35

During the subsistence of the subject proceedings,

¶36

the parties to the lis have settled the dispute among themselves and filed a joint memo along with an affidavit. The joint memo reads as follows:

¶37

JOINT MEMO

¶38

"The petitioners and respondent no.2 are most respectfully submits as follows:

¶39

It is submitted that the petitioners and respondent no.2 are filling this joint memo of compromise before this Hon'ble court.

¶40

It is submitted that at the intervention of the elders, friends and the family members of the petitioner's and legal heirs of the deceased, both the parties have decided to enter into this compromise and the both parties have no objection for quashing of the criminal case in Crime No. 0218/2019 pending in the file of Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore by way of mutual understandings.

¶41

It is submitted that both the parties came to end up the matter and proceeded to mediation and the mediator was appointed and the Agreement was drafted and the sum of Rs. 15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs only) was paid to the respondent by way of DD vide No. 063511 and 063512 dated 26-11-2024 drawn at HDFC Bank. A copy of the Mediation Agreement is enclosed herewith as Document No.1.

¶42

Wherefore for the reasons stated above the parties may be permitted to compromise and the above noted criminal petition may be allowed by quashing the impugned FIR in the interest of justice and equity."

¶43

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:17358 CRL.P No. 6877 of 2023

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

In the light of the settlement arrived at between the parties, I deem it appropriate to accept the joint memo and close the proceedings against the petitioners in the subject petition.

¶46

The crime so registered against the petitioners as

¶47

well as the charge sheet so filed pursuant to the crime in C.C.No.1476/2021 stands quashed.

¶48

For the aforesaid reasons, the following:

¶49

ORDER

¶50

(i) Criminal Petition is disposed .

¶51

(ii) Proceedings in C.C.No.1476/2021 (Crime No.218/2024) pending before the 32^nd Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, stands quashed qua the petitioners.

¶52

SD/(M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

¶53

List No.: 2 Sl No.: 2

¶54

Smt. Shahanaz Begum v. R.T Nagar Police Station

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Shahanaz Begum v. R.T Nagar 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

Sri Sri Ravi Shankar Vs State of Karnataka

Mr T Nagaraj Vs the State of Karnataka

J S Prasanna Kumar Vs State of Karnataka

Sudhakar Govindaray Kamat Vs State of Karnataka

Mahammed Ismail Ansari Vs State by

Eshwar Naidu R M Vs State of Karnataka