Mohammed Wasim vs State Of Karnataka on 4 September, 2017

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2017

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7009/2017

BETWEEN:

MOHAMMED WASIM
S/O. DR. MOHAMMED YOUSUFF,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
R/AT NO.28, 2ND CROSS,
R. SONAPPA BLOCK, J.C.NAGAR,
BENGALURU.
…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. USMAN P., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY J.C.NAGAR POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU – 560 046
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENGALURU – 560 001

2. DR. NIDA IBRAHIM
D/O. J.S.MOHAMMED IBRAHIM,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
R/AT NO.960, 8TH ‘B’ MAIN ROAD,
1ST STAGE, 2ND BLOCK,
HBR LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 043
…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP FOR R-1;
SRI. ABDUL RASHEED, ADV. FOR R-2)
2

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 CR.P.C.
PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET AND THE
ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.3433/2017 ON THE
FILE OF LEARNED VIII ACMM, BANGALORE.

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Petitioner, who has been arraigned as accused in

C.C.No.3433/2017 is pending on the file of VIII Addl.

Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru and is seeking

for quashing of said proceedings contending interalia

that petitioner and second respondent are living

separately and their marriage has been dissolved by

consent.

2. Heard Sri.P.Usman, learned counsel

appearing for petitioner, Sri.C.R.Abdul Rasheed, learned

counsel appearing for second respondent and

Sri.S.Rachaiah, learned HCGP appearing for first

respondent-State. Records would disclose that

petitioner married second respondent on 16.04.2015 as

per Islamic law and second respondent lodged a

complaint on 28.11.2016 before J.C.Nagar police

alleging that she was harassed with a demand for dowry
3

and after investigation, charge sheet came to be filed in

C.C.No.3433/2017 for the offence punishable under

Section 498A of IPC against the petitioner.

3. Today second respondent has filed an

affidavit along with memo stating thereunder that at the

intervention of well-wishers and friends matter is settled

out of Court and she does not intend to prosecute her

complaint and proceedings pending in

C.C.No.3433/2017 may be quashed.

4. Learned Advocates appearing for petitioner

and second respondent submits that though it is urged

in the affidavit that marriage is dissolved by way of

‘Khulanama’ as provided under ‘Shariath Law’, they

would hasten to add that they would not press the said

contention and submit that on account of marriage

having been dissolved by consent outside the Court,

second respondent – complainant is not interested in

prosecuting the complaint lodged by her, which has now

culminated in filing of an affidavit by her.
4

5. Second respondent-complainant is present

before Court and she submits that she has voluntarily

agreed to dissolve the marriage and there was no threat,

force or coercion from anyone. She also submits that

she has voluntarily agreed for proceedings against

petitioner being quashed. She has also stated that she

has received a sum of ` 3,00,000/- from petitioner

towards the maintenance of her minor child and she is

willing to withdraw the proceedings against petitioner

and prays for same being quashed.

6. Learned Advocates appearing for petitioner

and second respondent have identified the parties

present before Court and they have also filed a memo

enclosing identity cards of parties issued by the

statutory authorities and in token of having identified

the parties present, learned Advocates have also affixed

their signatures to the photocopies of the identity cards.

7. In the light of aforestated facts, this Court is

of the considered view that continuation of further

proceedings against petitioner would be an exercise in
5

futility and it would not sub-serve the ends of justice or

in other words, it would be an abuse of process of law.

Hence, keeping in mind the dicta laid down by the

Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of GIAN SINGH VS.

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER reported in (2012)

10 SCC 303, this Court is of the considered view that

prayer sought for by the petitioner deserves to be

granted.

Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

(i) Criminal petition is hereby allowed.

(ii) Proceedings pending against petitioner

in C.C.No.3433/2017 on the file of VIII

Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,

Bengaluru, is hereby quashed.

(iii) Petitioner is acquitted of the offence

punishable under Section 498A of IPC.

SD/-

JUDGE

DR

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *