Karnataka High Court

Dr K S Shankar Nayak vs The State By on 8 December, 2023

                                                     -1-
                                                                     NC: 2023:KHC:44773
                                                                 CRL.P No. 2436 of 2021




                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                             DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

                                                   BEFORE
                                  THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ
                                 CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2436 OF 2021
                      BETWEEN:
                      1.    DR. K.S. SHANKAR NAYAK
                            S/O LATE SAKRYA NAYAK,
                            AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS,
                            R/A. 1727/C5, 2ND MAIN, 2ND CROSS,
                            SIDDAVEERAPPA BADAVANE,
                            DAVANAGERE-577003.

                      2.    SMT. KUMARI SHATHABAI K
                            W/O DR. K.S. SHANKAR NAYAK,
                            AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
                            R/A NO.1727/C5, 2ND MAIN, 2ND CROSS,
                            SIDDAVEERAPPA BADAVANE,
                            DAVANAGERE-577003.

                      3.    SRI. AMIT S NAYAK
                            AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
                            S/O. K.S. SHANKAR NAYAK,
                            RESIDING AT 2ND MAIN, 2ND CROSS,
                            SIDDAVEERAPPA BADAVANE,
Digitally signed by
SUMA
                            DAVANAGERE-577003.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF              4.    SRI. ADARSH S NAYAK
KARNATAKA
                            AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
                            S/O DR. K.S. SHANKAR NAYAK,
                            R/A NO.1727, C/5, 2ND MAIN, 2ND CROSS,
                            SIDDAVEERAPPA BADAVANE,
                            DAVANAGERE-577003.
                                                                          ...PETITIONERS
                      (BY SRI. SANDEEP C.T., ADVOCATE)

                      AND:
                      1.    THE STATE BY
                            WOMENS SUB-INSPECTOR,
                            WOMENS POLICE STATION,
                            DAVANAGERE,
                              -2-
                                          NC: 2023:KHC:44773
                                      CRL.P No. 2436 of 2021




     REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
     HIGH COURT BLDG.,
     BENGALURU-560001.

2.   SMT. KAVANA @ ANUSHA
     W/O. AMIT S. NAYAK,
     AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS,
     2ND MAIN, 2ND CROSS,
     SIDDAVEERAPPA BADAVANE,
     DAVANAGERE-577003.
                                               ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. N. ANITHA GIRISH, HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER
FOR RESPONDENT NO.1;
SRI. JOHN PAUL A., ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2)

      THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO PERUSE AND QUASH THE
SAME AS ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL AND VOID AND IN CONTRAVENTIONS
TO VARIOUS JUDGMENT RELATING TO THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS
IN CR.NO.86/2019 (S.C.NO.2/2021) ON THE FILE OF THE
PRL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DAVANAGERE ON BEING
TRANSFERRED FROM II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGES COURT TO
SESSIONS COURT, DAVANAGERE FOR THE OFFENCE ALLEGED
UNDER SECTIONS 498A, 506, 34, 354, 354A, 307, 323, 114, 504,
417 AND UNDER SECTIONS 3, 4, 6 OF D.P ACT.

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

The petitioners have challenged the prosecution launched

against them in C.C.No.727/2020 (arising out of

Cr.No.86/2019) pending trial before the Principal District and

Sessions Judge, Davanagere for the offence punishable under

Sections 498A, 506, 354, 354A, 307, 323, 114, 504, 417 read

with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (henceforth

NC: 2023:KHC:44773

referred to as 'IPC' for short) and Sections 3 and 4 Dowry

Prohibition Act, 1961.

2. The parties have filed a joint memo which reads as

follows:

"The Petitioners and the Respondent No.2 humbly submits that they have mutually resolved the disputes between them and are willing to with draw this case and other cases if any filed by either parties. However the parties have settled the disputes and drawn a mutual settlement agreement at the Bangalore Mediation Centre. The parties have filed also filed a Joint affidavit along Compromise application as annexed along. The same may be pleased to be taken on record in the ends of Justice and Equity."

Pursuant to the joint memo, they also filed a joint

affidavit, which reads as follows:

"I, KS Shankar Nayak K. S, S/o. late Sakrya nayak aged about 74 years and Kumari Shathibai.k w/o. K S Shankar Nayak aged about 63 years and Amit S nayak s/o. shankar Nayak all residing at Adarsh, 2nd cross BIET road, near Canara Bank, Davanagere- 577003 and Adarsh S nayak s/o KS Shankar Nayak residing at super specialty in Ophthalmology Aravind Eye Hospital (Eye Foundation) Quarters no.B,

NC: 2023:KHC:44773

Bellandur, Bangalore-572106 the petitioners no.1 to 4 and Kavana @ Anusha d/o. Kumar Nayak aged about 25 years the respondent no.2 jointly do hereby solemnly affirm and state as follows:

1. We state that the Petitioner no.3 and the Respondent no.2 were married on 07-07-

2019 at Shamnur Shivashankarappa Paravathamma Samudhaya Bhavan, Davangere, as per Hindu customary rites. Due to certain irreconcilable differences and incompatibility of the temperaments, their marriage is irretrievably broken down and they could not reconcile their differences and the parties have started living separately with in two months from the date of marriage i.e., since September, 2019. All the efforts and advises of their elders, relatives, and friends to reunite them has failed.

2. We State that the Petitioner no.1 is K.S.Shankar Nayak, Petitioner no.2 is Kumari Shanthibai, Petitioner No.3 is Amit S Nayak and Petitioner no.4 is Adarsh S Nayak. The Petitioner no.3 - Amit S Nayak and Respondent no.2 - Kavana were married on 07-07-2019. Copy of the Aadhar Cards of the Petitioners and respondent no.2 is

NC: 2023:KHC:44773

produced herewith as Document no.1,2,3,4,5.

3. We state that we know the facts of the case, the Respondent no.2 had filed an complaint against the Petitioners before the Respondent no.1 police and a crime was registered as FIR no. 86 /2019 before the Women's Police Station, Davanagere for the offences punishable under section 498A, 506, 34, 354, 354A, 307, 323, 114, 504, 417 of IPC-1860 and under section 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act-1961 and the chargesheet was filed before the Hon'ble II Addl. Civil Judges Court, Davanagere as CC no.727/2020 and further being committed to the Hon'ble Prl. District and Sessions Judge, Davanagere as S.C. no.2/2021 now set for trial and pending disposal and the stage of trail stands as Hearing before charge and the next date is on 19-12-2023.

4. We state that Petitioners and Respondent no.2 agrees to withdraw the cases filed against each other as agreed in the M.C.no.4860 /2022 ( II Addl. Principal Judge Family Court, Bangalore) -Mediation Report Memorandum of settlement Under Section 89 of CPC read with Rules 24, 25 of the

NC: 2023:KHC:44773

Karnataka Civil Procedure (Mediation) Rules- 2005, Dated: 24-03-2023 and further agrees all conditions as per agreement. The said M.C. no.4860/2022 is decreed granting divorce and disposed on 27-2-2023.

5. We state that this compromise is very much essential for establishing cordial and good relationship between the parties and to put an end to litigation and endure peace and harmony among the parties. Petitioners and the Respondent No.2 have settled all disputes between them amicably out of uninfluenced free will and volition, upon due reflection and deliberations with the elders. In view of the settlement, the Petitioner has decided to put a quietus to all disputes hence this compromise between them so as to continue with their future on their own will and pursue their careers without any factor inhibiting the same.

6. We state that in view of the settlement arrived at by the parties no purpose would be served if the aforesaid criminal case is allowed to continue and the same would therefore be an exercise in futility. Further, in view of the fact that the dispute has arisen out of a matrimonial relationship and the

NC: 2023:KHC:44773

same has been settled amicably, the ends of justice would also not be served in the proceedings are allowed to continue. As such, the same may be quashed.

7. We state and rely that the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303, Para 54, 57 and that after examining the dictum laid down in Gian Singh's case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Narinder Singh vs State of Punjab, reported in 2014(6)SCC466 laid down the following guidelines with respect to quashing of criminal proceedings based on compromise- Para 31.

8. It is submitted that in view of the fact that the aforesaid precedents are squarely applicable to the above case and the matter has been compromised amicably out of free will and volition so as to put a quietus to the dispute which has arisen out of a matrimonial relationship, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash the above proceedings as sort in the prayer now as SC no.2 /2021.

NC: 2023:KHC:44773

9. We state that we humbly beg this Hon'ble court to allow this Joint Affidavit and Quash proceeding and crime as compromised in the interest of Justice and Equity."

3. In view of the above, the petition is allowed and

the prosecution initiated against the petitioners in

C.C.No.727/2020 (Cr.No.86/2019) for the offences punishable

under Sections 498A, 506, 354, 354A, 307, 323, 114, 504, 417

read with Section 34 of IPC, pending trial before the Principal

District and Sessions Judge, Davanagere, which is now

numbered as S.C.No.2/2021 is quashed.

4. The petitioner and respondent No.2 are present.

The respondent No.2 submits that she understood the terms of

the settlement and also concede dispute with the petitioner.

5. In token of acceptance of terms of settlement, the

parties have affixed their signatures to the order sheet of this