1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K. N. PHANEENDRA
CRL.P. NO.888/2015
AND
CRL.P. NO.5031/2018
IN CRL.P. NO.888/2015
BETWEEN
1. C. P. NARAYANA SWAMY
S/O LATE CHENNARAYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
2. SMT. RATHNAMMA
W/O C. P. NARAYANA SWAMY
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
3. CHINNARAJU
S/O C. P. NARAYANA SWAMY
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
4. SUDHIR
S/O C. P. NARAYANA SWAMY
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
ALL ARE R/AT K.G. PURA
SHIDLAGHATTA, CHEEMANGALA(P)
JANGAMAKOTE(H), CHIKKABALLAPURA
DISTRICT – 562 101
… PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SHARATH GOWDA G. B., ADV.)
2
IN CRL.P. 5031/2018
BETWEEN
1. MUNEGOWDA
S/O C P NARAYANASWAMY
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
R/AT K G PURA, SHIDLAGHATTA
CHICKBALLAPURA DIST 562 101
ALSO AT #19, 2ND FLOOR
C/O RAMA KRISHNA BUILDING
3RD CROSS, LAKSHMIPURA LAYOUT
DEVASANDRA, K.R.PURAM
BANGALORE
2. ARUNA KUMARI
D/O REVANNA
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
R/AT NO.141/1
D.M CHANNAPPA BUILDING
DODDAMARALI, NANDI HOBLI
CHICKABALLAPUR 562 101
ALSO AT
C/O SRINIVASAIAH HOME
2ND MAIN, 2ND CROSS
BYATARAYANAPURA
MYSORE ROAD, BANGALORE … PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SHARATH GOWDA G. B. ADV.)
AND
1. STATE BY KRISHNARAJAPURA
POLICE, K.R.PURA, BANGALORE-36
STATE BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
STATE BY SPP
2. DIVYA M.
W/O MUNEGOWDA N.
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
R/AT NO.19, C/O RAMAKRISHNA
3
BUILDING, 2ND FLOOR
DEVASANDRA, 3rd CROSS,
K.R. PURAM, BANGALORE-36
… RESPONDENTS
(COMMON IN BOTH PETITIONS)
(BY SRI. S. RACHAIAH, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. SARAVANA S. ADV. FOR R2.)
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.888/2015 IS FILED
U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE
SHEET FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT POLICE IN
CRIME NO.89/2012 AND IN C.C.NO.51030/2013 AND
CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN
S.C.NO.1217/2014 PENDING ON THE FILE OF XLV
ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND S.J., BANGALORE AS AGAINST
THE PETITIONERS.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5031/2018 IS FILED
U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE
SHEET FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT POLICE IN
CR.NO.89/2012 AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE
ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN S.C.NO.1217/2014, PENDING
ON THE FILE OF LXXI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-72) AS AGAINST
THESE PETITIONERS.
THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Sri. Saravana S., Advocate, files power for
Respondent No.2 in Crl. P. No.5031/2018 and he has
been already appearing for Respondent No.2 in Crl. P.
No.888/2015.
4
2. Both the petitions are arising out of common
case in SC No.1217/2014. It is reported that both the
parties have compromised the matter by compounding
the offences alleged in the said case. In both the cases,
the 2nd respondent has filed separate affidavit stating
that, she has no objection to quash the said proceedings
on the ground that, the parties have compromised the
matters.
3. The petitioners in Criminal Petition
No.888/2015 are arraigned as Accused Nos. 2 to 5 and
Petitioners in Crl.P. 5031/2018 are arraigned as
Accused Nos. 1 and 6 respectively in SC No.1217/2014,
which is pending on the file of 71st Addl. City Civil and
Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable
under Sections 498A, 497, 324, 506(B), 307 r/w.
Section 34 of IPC and also under Sections 3 4 of the
Dowry Prohibition Act (for short, ‘D.P. Act’).
4. The 2nd respondent, in the affidavit has
categorically stated that, her husband-Munegowda has
filed a divorce petition in MC No.3184/2015 on the file
of the 5th Addl. Family Court, Bengaluru, and the said
5
case was referred to Bengaluru Mediation Centre to
explore the possibility of settlement. Thereafter, at the
intervention of the mediator, relatives and family friends
of the petitioners and Respondent No.2, they have
amicably resolved their dispute and in fact they have
decided to live together in future for the better interest
of themselves keeping in mind the future of their
children.
5. The offences alleged in SC No.1217/2014
are under Sections 498-A, 497, 324, 506(2) and 307 of
IPC and also under Sections 3 4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act. Except Section 307 of IPC perhaps all
other offences are arising out of domestic relationship
between the parties. Section 307 in fact is not attracted
because, there was actually no injuries caused to the
2nd respondent. It is only alleged that the Accused
No.1-Munegowda was holding a knife in his hand and
threatened to kill the 2nd respondent. No injury
certificate as such is produced before the trial Court in
this regard. Therefore, there is no attraction of Section
307 of IPC, though the police have invoked the said
6
provision. Even otherwise, in a decision of the Hon’ble
Apex Court reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466 [Narinder
Singh Ors Vs. State of Punjab and Anr.], it is
categorically stated that, even the offence under Section
307 of IPC is alleged, if the parties have settled matter
between themsevles, though the said offence is a crime
against the society, but depending upon the facts and
circumstances of each cases, the court has to examine
and if necessary the court can permit the parties to
compound the offences. In another ruling reported in
Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another [
(2012) 10 SCC 303], it has been held that, when the
dispute between the parties is essentially domestic in
nature and the parties have solved their problems
amongst themselves and particularly the husband and
wife have decided to reside together, the court can
exercise powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. In my
opinion, this is one such case. Therefore, the pendency
of the criminal case should not be a hurdle for the
parties to lead their life happily in future. Therefore,
when they compromised the matter, it is just and
necessary to quash the proceedings as prayed for.
7
Hence, in the facts and circumstances of the case, I
pass the following:
ORDER
The petitions are allowed. The affidavit
filed by the 2nd respondent and the compromise
application filed by the parties in these two
petitions are accepted. Consequently, the case in
SC No.1217/2014 (arising out of Crime
No.89/2012 of Krishnarajapura Police Station)
registered against the petitioners for the offences
punishable under Sections 498(A), 497, 324,
506(B), 307 r/w. 34 of IPC and Sections 3 4 of
D.P. Act., on the file of the XLV Addl. City Civil
and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru/Principal City Civil
and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru, which is now
stated to have been pending on the file of 71st
Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru
(CCH-72) and all further proceedings therein, in
so far as the petitioners concerned, are hereby
quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
KGR*
