Dismissed

Ramesh Bhat v. Meghana @ Pushpavathi

Karnataka HC15 Sept 2026CRL.P/695/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a short oral order in a Criminal Petition seeking quashing of proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. The High Court of Karnataka dismissed the petition as infructuous on the submission that the matter was settled before the Trial Court. No detailed reasoning or citation of law appears in this order.

What did the court decide?

None. The petition seeking quashing was dismissed as infructuous.

Ramesh Bhat Vs Meghana @ Pushpavathi — Domestic Violence | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

1 - NC: 2026:KHC:50302 CRL.P No. 695 of 2020

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

CNR: KAHC010009832020

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.695 OF 2020

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

RAMESH BHAT S/O LATE PUNDAREKA BHAT AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/AT KARMAYI HOUSE 102 NEKKILADY VILLAGE MARDALA POST, KADABA TALUK D.K.DISTRICT-574 230

¶11

Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

RAJESH BHAT S/O LATE PUNDAREKA BHAT AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS R/AT KARMAYI HOUSE 102 NEKKILADY VILLAGE MARDALA POST, KADABA TALUK D.K.DISTRICT-574 230

¶13

SUMATHI BHAT W/O LATE PUNDAREKA BHAT AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS R/AT KARMAYI HOUSE 102 NEKKILADY VILLAGE MARDALA POST, KADABA TALUK D.K.DISTRICT-574 230

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SRI. NISHAL S REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI KETHAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

¶16

¶17

NC: 2026:KHC:50302 CRL.P No. 695 of 2020

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

CNR: KAHC010009832020

¶20

AND:

¶21

MEGHANA @ PUSHPAVATHI D/O MAHESH AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS R/AT KARMAYI HOUSE 102 NEKKILADY VILLAGE MARDALA POST KADABA HOBLI, PUTTUR TALUK D.K.DISTRICT-574 230

¶22

PRESENTLY R/AT NEAR SANTHEPETE HIGH SCHOOL VALLABHAI ROAD, HASSAN CITY-573 201

¶23

…RESPONDENT

¶24

(V/O DT. 22.07.2026, SERVICE OF NOTICE TO RESPONDENT IS H/S)

¶25

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR. PRAYING TO

¶26

QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CRL.MISC.NO.909/2019 PENDING BEFORE THE VI ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HASSAN (VIDE ANNEXURE-A) FILED BY THE RESPONDENT AGAINST THE PETITIONERS UDDER SECTION 12 OF THE PROTECTION OF WOMEN FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT AND ETC.

¶27

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

¶28

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:50302 CRL.P No. 695 of 2020

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

CNR: KAHC010009832020

¶31

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

¶32

ORAL ORDER

¶33

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the matter is settled before the Trial Court and hence, this petition has become infructuous. The said submission is taken on record. In view of the said submission, the petition is dismissed as having become infructuous.

¶34

Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE

¶35

Ramesh Bhat v. Meghana @ Pushpavathi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Bhat v. Meghana @ Pushpavathi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases