1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF MAY 2019
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3455 OF 2019
BETWEEN:
1. Sri. Kumar. C
S/o Channabasavaiah
aged about 45 years
resident of No. 4/1
3rd ‘A’ Cross, 7th ‘B’ cross
SVG Nagar, Moddalapalya
Bengaluru – 560 091.
2. Sri. Channappa
S/o Late Basappa,
aged about 71 years
resident of Ghattipura Village
Kasaba Hobli, Magadi Taluk
Ramanagara District
Ramanagara – 562 129.
3. Sri. Basavarajaiaya
S/o Channabasavaiah @ Kenchappa
aged about 50 years
Resident of 133,
Balaji Layout
Badarahalli Magadi Main Road
Begnaluru – 560 091.
4. Smt. Gangabhadramma
D/o Channabasavaiah @ Kenchappa,
W/o Srikantaiah
2
aged about 53 years
resident of Kempegowdanagara
Badarahalli, Magadi Main Road
Bengaluru – 560 091.
… Petitioners
(By Sri. Harsha D. Joshi, Advocate)
And:
1. State of Karnataka
by Vijayanagara Police Station
Vijayanagara Sub-Division
Bangalore City
Rep by Special Public Prosecutor
High Court of Karnataka
Bengaluru – 560 001.
2. Smt. B.M. Shobha
w/o C. Kumar
aged about 34 years
residing at no.4/1
3rd ‘A cross, (7th cross)
SVG Nagar
(shanthaveri gopalagowdanagar)
Moodalapalya
Bengaluru – 560 072.
… Respondents
(By Sri. Vijaya Kumar Majage, Addl. SPP for R-1;
Sri. Ramanjaneya. V, Advocate for R-2)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section
482 of Cr.P.C. praying to 1.Quash the FIR
registered by the respondent Vijayanagara P.S. in
crime No.511 of 2015 vide, Annexure-A on a
complaint lodged against the petitioners for the
offence alleged to have been committed by the
petitioners under Sectionsection 498a,Section324,Section504,Section506,Section109
read with 34 of SectionIPC and etc.
3
This Petition coming on for Admission, this
day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER
Sri. Harsha D. Joshi, learned counsel for the
petitioners.
Sri. Vijaya Kumar Majage, learned counsel for
respondent No.1.
Sri. Ramanjaneya V., learned counsel for
respondent No.2.
The petition is admitted for hearing. With the
consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same
is heard finally.
2. In this petition under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioners
inter alia seek quashment of the proceedings
registered vide C.C.No.7095/2016 pending before
XXIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at
Bengaluru for the offences punishable under
4
Sections 498A, Section323, Section504, Section506, Section109 read with
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. When the matter was taken up today,
learned counsel for the parties have produced the
joint affidavit. Learned counsel for the parties as
well as parties have stated that they have amicably
settled the dispute against themselves.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the
parties and have perused the record. Admittedly,
the complainant and the accused have entered into
a compromise and have settled the dispute
amicably between themselves. There is no chance
of conviction against the accused and the entire
exercise of trial would be an exercise in futility. It is
well settled in law that this Court in exercise of
powers under Section 482 of the Code can quash
the proceedings in respect of even a non
compoundable offence in the light of the guidelines
laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case
5
of ‘PARBATBHAI AAHIR VS. STATE OF
GUJRAT’, (2017) 9 SCC 641.
5. In view of the aforesaid enunciation of
law and in view of the guidelines laid down by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the aforementioned
decision, in order to secure the ends of justice and
taking into account the fact that the parties have
amicably resolved the dispute, I deem it
appropriate to exercise the inherent powers to
quash the criminal proceedings.
6. In the result, the proceedings in
C.C.No.7095/2016 pending before XXIV Additional
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Bengaluru for the
offences punishable under Sections 498A, Section323, Section504,
Section506, Section109 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal
Code in view of the compromise arrived at between
the parties are hereby quashed. Accordingly, the
petition is disposed of.
6
7. In view of the disposal of the main
petition, pending Interlocutory Application does not
survive for consideration. Accordingly, the same is
disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Mds/-
