Karnataka High Court

Sri. Raju vs State Of Karnataka on 5 May, 2022

Bench: S Vishwajith Bysvsj

                                1

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

           DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MAY, 2022

                         BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

           CRIMINAL PETITION No.3948 OF 2022

BETWEEN:

SRI. RAJU,
S/O RAMASWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
R/AT NO.146, OPP. TO
VENKATESHWARASWAMY TEMPLE,
5TH CROSS, SUNDAR NAGAR, GOKULA,
BENGALURU - 560 054.
                                          ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI.ANAND R.V., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     STATE OF KARNATAKA,
       BY JALAHALLI POLICE STATION,
       BENGALURU CITY.
       REPRESENTED BY
       STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
       ATTACHED TO HIGH COURT BUILDING,
       BENGALURU - 01.

2.     VARSHITHA. R.,
       D/O RAJU,
       AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS,
       SINCE MINOR,
       REPRESENTED BY HER
       NATURAL GUARDIAN AND MOTHER
       SMT. ASHA,
       W/O RAJU,
       AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
       R/AT NO.146, OPP:
       VENKATESHWARA SWAMY TEMPLE,
       5TH CROSS, SUNDARNAGAR, GOKUL,
                                2

     BENGALURU - 560 054.

3.   SMT. ASHA,
     W/O RAJU,
     AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
     R/AT NO.146, OPP:
     VENKATESHWARA SWAMY TEMPLE,
     5TH CROSS, SUNDARNAGAR, GOKUL,
     BENGALURU - 560 054.
                                          ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.H.S.SHANKAR, HCGP FOR R1;
    SRI.R.V.SHIVANANDA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3)

      THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF
CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN
C.C.NO.9271/2022    (IN  CR.NO.6/2022)    JALAHALLI POLICE
BENGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A, 323, 307 OF
IPC ON THE FILE OF THE 39TH A.C.M.M., AT BENGALURU.

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

                          ORDER

The petitioner who is the sole accused in

C.C.No.9271/2022 arising out of Crime No.6/2022

registered by Jalahalli Police station for the offences

punishable under Sections 498A, 323 and 307 of IPC,

which is pending on the file of XXXIX A.C.M.M., Bengaluru,

has filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C with a

prayer to quash the entire proceedings in the said case.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as

learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 at the out-set

submit that the dispute is between the family members

and at the intervention of the well-wishers and the elders of

the family, the dispute has been amicably settled and an

application under Section 320(2) r/w Section 482 Cr.P.C

has been filed seeking permission of this Court to

compound the alleged offences against the petitioner.

3. In the affidavit filed in support of the

application, respondent No.3, who is the mother of

respondent No.2 and wife of petitioner, has stated as

follows:

"2. I state that, my minor daughter Kumari.Varshitha.R. aged about 16 years, was lodged the complaint on 23-01-2022 before the Jalahalli Police, the respondent No.1 police have registered the case in Crime No.06/2022 for offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 307 of IPC, after the investigation the charge sheet has filed, the Learned Magistrate have took the cognizance and registered the Criminal Case in C.C.No.9271/2022 pending on the file of the XXXIX Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Bengaluru.

3. I state that, after lodging the complaint the police have arrested the petitioner and he is in judicial custody and during the pendency of the above case, in intervention of elders, well-wishers, my family friends, my families of both the sides, the dispute between us amicably settled/compromised and we have cordial relationship with the petitioner and myself and my minor daughter have not interested to prosecute the case. My husband is in judicial custody since from 24-01-2022 due to the domestic quarrel in my family. Thereafter, I am facing financial problem to lead our livelihood and we are depending on my husband earnings for our livelihood, he is only the bread earner of our family. Hence under the said circumstances, myself and the petitioner have compromised the matter and will not prosecute the case against the petitioner. I am herewith producing Aadhar cards of myself and my minor daughter.

4. I further submit that, the respondent No.2 is my minor daughter she is studying and her education expenses is very much required; I am unable to bear her educational expenses and also lead daily minimum needs.

5. I further submit that, I have no objection to quash the entire proceedings against the petitioner, if not allowed the petition our entire family would be put to great hardship and injury and on the other hand no hardship will be caused."

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as

learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 submit that if

the parties are not permitted to compound the offences

alleged against the petitioner, they will be put to serious

hardship as the petitioner is the only bread earner of the

family. They also submit that the relationship between the

parties is also likely to get deteriorated and have further

submitted that continuation of the proceedings would serve

no purpose. It is also submitted by them that the injuries

suffered by respondent No.3 are simple in nature. They

have relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab

and another reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303.

5. I have considered the submissions made on

behalf of the petitioner as well as respondent Nos.2 and 3

and also perused the application filed for compounding.

6. Respondent Nos.2 and 3, who are present in the

court, are identified by their Advocate and on enquiry, they

have stated that out of their own free volition, without

there being any undue influence or coercion, they have

filed the application for compounding the alleged offences

against the petitioner.

7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian

Singh (supra) at Paragraph No.58 has observed as follows:

"58. Where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. No doubt,

crimes are acts which have harmful effect on the public and consist in wrong-doing that seriously endangers and threatens the well-being of the society and it is not safe to leave the crime- doer only because he and the victim have settled the dispute amicably or that the victim has been paid compensation, yet certain crimes have been made compoundable in law, with or without the permission of the Court. In respect of serious offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc; or other offences of mental depravity under IPC or offences of moral turpitude under special statutes, like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity, the settlement between the offender and the victim can have no legal sanction at all.

However, certain offences which overwhelmingly and predominantly bear civil flavour having arisen out of civil, mercantile, commercial, financial, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony, particularly relating to dowry, etc. or the family dispute, where the wrong is basically to the victim and the offender and the victim have settled all disputes between them amicably, irrespective of the fact that such offences have not been made compoundable, the High Court may within the framework of its inherent power, quash the

criminal proceeding or criminal complaint or F.I.R if it is satisfied that on the face of such settlement, there is hardly any likelihood of the offender being convicted and by not quashing the criminal proceedings, justice shall be casualty and ends of justice shall be defeated. The above list is illustrative and not exhaustive. Each case will depend on its own facts and no hard-and-fast category can be prescribed."

8. Considering the fact that the petitioner is the

father of respondent No.2 and husband of respondent No.3

and taking into consideration the allegations made in the

complaint and the nature of injuries suffered by

respondent No.3, I am of the considered view that it is a fit

case for exercise of the inherent powers of this Court under

Section 482 Cr.P.C and permit the petitioner and

respondent Nos.2 and 3 to compound the offences in

C.C.No.9271/2022 which is pending on the file of XXXIX

A.C.M.M., Bengaluru. As rightly contended by the learned

counsel for the parties, the continuation of impugned

proceedings would serve no purpose and on the other

hand, it is likely to cause prejudice to the parties.

9. Under the circumstances, I am of the view that

it is a fit case wherein this Court is required to exercise the

power under Section 482 C.P.C. Accordingly, the following;

ORDER

(i) The petition is allowed.

(ii) The petitioner and respondent Nos.2 and 3 are permitted to compound the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323 and 307 of IPC., in C.C.No.9271/2022 arising out of Crime No.6/2022 registered by Jalahalli police station pending on the file of XXXIX A.C.M.M., Bengaluru and consequently, the entire proceedings in the said case stands quashed as against the petitioner.