1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2017
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1727/2017
BETWEEN:
1. APOORV ASHOK BADAM
S/O. DR. ASHOK BADAMI
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
2. MEENA ASHOK BADAM
W/O. DR. ASHOK BADAMI,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
3. CHETHAN ASHOK BADAM
S/O. DR. ASHOK BADAMI,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
ALL THE ABOVE R/AT B4 06,
TRI FECTA ESPLANADE APPARTMENTS,
BELATHUR, KADUGODI,
BANGALORE- 560 067
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. CHANDRA MOHAN K, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KADUGODI POLICE STATION,
BANGALORE.
2. SUDHA APOORV BADAMI
W/O. APOORV ASHOK BADAMI
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
R/AT DORR NO.30, 8TH MAIN,
2
7TH CROSS, SARASWATHIPURAM,
MYSORE- 570 009
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.S.RACHAIAH, HCGP FOR R-2;
SRI. GOPINATH, ADV. FOR R-1)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 CR.P.C.
PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN
C.C.NO.2967/2015 ON THE FILE OF II ACJM, BANGALORE
PERTAINING TO FIR NO.361/2014 ON THE FILEO F
KADUGODI P.S., BANGALORE.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Petitioners who have been arraigned as accused
No.1 to 3 in C.C.No.2967/2015 registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 498A r/w Section
34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition
Act, 1961, are seeking of quashing of said proceedings.
2. I have heard the arguments of Sri.Chandra
Mohan K., learned counsel appearing for petitioners,
Sri.S.Rachaiah, learned HCGP appearing for first
respondent-State and Sri.Gopinath, learned counsel
appearing for second respondent. Perused the case
papers.
3
3. Marriage between first petitioner and second
respondent came to be solemnised on 15.04.2012 at
Mysore and on account of certain disputes having
arisen, they were residing separately. Second
respondent herein filed a complaint on 09.12.2014
before first respondent – Kadugodi Police Station
alleging that she was being harassed by petitioners with
a demand for dowry. Second respondent also filed a
petition under Section 12 of the Protection of Women
from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 in Crl.Misc.
No.1/2015 she also filed a petition for restitution of
conjugal rights on the file of before JMFC-III Court,
Mysore and it came to be dismissed at the request of
parties, since it was stated before said Court that matter
was being settled. Subsequently, both parties filed a
petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act,
1955, in M.C.No.673/2016 for dissolution of their
marriage by mutual consent and said petition came to
be allowed by the I Addl. Prl. Family Court, Mysore by
4
judgment dated 07.08.2017. Certified copy of the same
has been placed on record.
4. In the light of marriage having been
dissolved, second respondent herein has filed an
affidavit dated 07.07.2017 stating thereunder that she
is not willing to prosecute the criminal case initiated by
her against the petitioners. In the light of said affidavit
filed, she has appeared before Court and submits that
out of her free own will and volition, without any force,
threat or coercion she has filed the said affidavit. She
also states that she has no objection for the proceedings
being quashed namely, proceedings in
C.C.No.2967/2015 pending before I Addl. Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Bangalore.
4. In order to establish the identity of parties
present before Court, learned Advocates appearing for
the parties have filed a memo enclosing photocopies of
the identity cards issued by the statutory authorities.
Learned Advocates appearing on behalf of parties have
5
also counter signed the said photocopies of the identity
cards. Said memo with enclosures are placed on record.
5. In the light of second respondent – wife
having agreed unconditionally to withdraw the
complaint filed before first respondent and she having
expressed her consent before this Court that she is no
more interested in prosecuting the complaint and she
has no objection for proceedings being quashed, this
Court is of the considered view that continuation of
proceedings in C.C.No.2967/2017 against petitioners
would not be in the interest of parties and it would be
abuse of process of law as held by the Apex Court in the
case of GIAN SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND
ANOTHER reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303,.
Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) Criminal petition is hereby allowed.
(ii) Proceedings pending against
petitioners in C.C.No.2967/2015 on
the file of Addl. Chief Judicial
6
Magistrate, Bengaluru, is hereby
quashed.
(iii) Petitioners are acquitted of the
offences punishable under Section
498A r/w Section 34 of IPC and
Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition
Act, 1961.
SD/-
JUDGE
DR
