Mr Sunil Hegde vs The State Of Karnataka
2022 Latest Caselaw 1591 Kant

                        1


 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 02ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                      BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN

     WRIT PETITION No.8447 OF 2020 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

1.    MR SUNIL HEGDE
      S/O SRIDHAR J HEGDE
      AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
      R/AT VENKATARAMANA NILAYA,
      H.NO. 206, NEAR POOJA BAKERY,
      RAMAGONDANAHALLI BADAVANE WHITEFIELD
      BANGALORE - 560 066

2.    MR SRIDHAR J HEGDE
      S/O JAYADEVA HEGDE
      AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
      R/AT SHRAVANA AGENCY
      1ST CROSS, SWAMY VIVEKNANDA
      NAGARA, SIRSI
      UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT-581 401.

3.    SMT. KAMALAVATHI HEGDE
      W/O SRIDHAR HEGDE
      AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
      R/AT SHRAVANA AGENCY
      1ST CROSS, SWAMY VIVEKNANDA
      NAGARA, SIRSI
      UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT-581 401.
                                   ...PETITIONERS
                           2


(BY SRI RAJESH SHETTIGAR FOR ARYA LAW CHAMBER,
ADVOCATES)

AND:

1.   THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
     THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
     SHIVAMOGGA WOMEN POLICE STATION,
     KOTE CIRCLE, SHIVAMOGGA
     REPRESENTED BY
     STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
     HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
     BANGALORE - 560 001

2.   SMT. ASHWINI
     W/O SUNIL HEGDE
     D/O B N SHREEDHAR
     AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
     R/AT NO.169, 5TH CROSS,
     RAJENDRANAGARA
     SHIVAMOGGA-577 201.
                                        ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP FOR R1;
    SRI. B.S.PRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W
SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ENTIRE   PROCEEDINGS          AGAINST     PETITIONERS
PENDING ON THE FILE OF II JMFC, SHIVAMOGGA IN
C.C.NO.2090/2019   VIDE       ANNEXURE-B    FOR   THE
                              3


OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 498A, 323,
504, 506 AND 34 OF IPC.


     THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
THIS DAY THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING,                  THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                         ORDER

This petition is filed by the petitioners-accused

Nos.1 to 3 under Articles 226 and 227 of the

Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

for quashing the criminal proceedings against the

petitioners in C.C.No.2090/2019 pending on the file of

the II JMFC, Shivamogga for the offences punishable

under Sections 323, 498A, 504 and 506 read with

Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel

for the petitioners, the learned high court government

leader for respondent-State and the learned counsel

for respondent No.2.

3. The case of the prosecution is that one

Ashwini-respondent No.2 filed a complaint before the

police on 30.07.2019 alleging that she got married to

the first petitioner, who is said to have harassed her

mentally and physically and also abused her and

assaulted her. Therefore, she lodged a complaint.

After registering the case, the police investigated the

matter and filed a charge sheet. Subsequently, both

petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 have filed a joint

petition under Section 13-(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act

for divorce by mutual consent. After hearing both

parties and examining the witnesses, the Principal

Judge, Family Court, Shivamogga, in MC.No.296/2020,

delivered a judgment on 04.06.2021 and granted a

decree of divorce by mutual consent under Section 13-

(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act. The reference available

at paragraphs-11, 12, 13 of the judgment is that the

parties agreed to settle their dispute and they resile

from each other by decree of divorce. The respondent

No.2 herein undertakes to withdraw the criminal cases

and petitioner No.1 herein undertakes to withdraw the

Miscellaneous Case No.112/2019 filed against the

respondent No.2-Wife. Based upon the evidence on the

13-(B) application, the Family Court allowed the

petition and granted a decree of divorce. The learned

counsel for respondent No.2 also admitted the same.

In view of settling their dispute and undertakings

given by respondent No.2 before the Family Court for

withdrawing the criminal case, they obtained the

divorce. Such being the case, allowing the conduct of

criminal proceedings is an abuse of the process of law.

4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has also held in

the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and

another reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, when the

matters are settled between the parties in a

matrimonial case, the Court can accept the settlement

and quash the criminal proceedings.

5. In view of a decree of divorce by mutual

consent passed by the Family Court and the settlement

between the parties, Respondent No.2 herein received

a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- as the permanent. Such being

the case, allowing the prosecution to proceed with the

case, is nothing but a abuse of process of law.

Accordingly, I pass the following:

ORDER

The criminal petition is allowed.

All further proceedings in C.C.No.2090/2019

pending on the file of the II JMFC, Shivamogga for the

offences punishable under Sections 323, 498A, 504 and

506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code,

1860, are hereby quashed.

In view of disposal of the main petition, the

pending application, if any, does not survive for

consideration. Accordingly, it is disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE

KTY