SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Kar) 720

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH 
VENKATESH NAIK T., J.
Sri. Manjunath, S/o. Maruteppa Bhajantri and Ors. – Petitioners
Versus 
The State of Karnataka, R/by. Its State Public Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad, (Through Koppal Women PS) and Anr. – Respondents
Criminal Petition No. 101325 of 2024 (482 OF Cr.PC/528 of BNSS)
Decided On : 10-06-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:Sri. B. C. Jnanayya Swami, Advocate
For the Respondents: Smt. Kirtilata R. Patil, HCGP, Sri. Syed R. H, Adv.

The court can exercise its power under Section 482 to quash criminal proceedings even in non-compoundable offences if the parties have amicably settled their disputes, preventing abuse of the legal process.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections 482 and 320 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 506, 498A, 504, 323, read with Section 149 - Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 - Quashing of criminal proceedings - Petitioners sought to quash proceedings arising from a marital dispute leading to allegations of harassment and dowry demands. The parties amicably resolved their differences with the complainant withdrawing her allegations, hence, the Court ruled in favor of quashing the proceedings as continuation would be an abuse of legal process. (Paras 2, 3, 10, 12)

(B) Settlement - The High Court emphasized that inherent powers under Section 482 allow for quashing even non-compoundable crimes when parties have settled, provided it serves justice and prevents abuse. (Paras 11)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners, a husband and his family, faced allegations from the complainant, their wife and daughter-in-law, after marital disputes led to criminal charges related to dowry death and harassment. The parties reconciled and desired to withdraw the case, confirming no coercion was involved in their settlement.

Findings of Court:
The Court accepted the compromise, deeming the continuation of the trial unnecessary and an abuse of law.

Issues: The primary issues included whether the continuation of prosecution was warranted given the resolution of the marital dispute.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court underlined that settled disputes, especially in familial contexts, should be resolved to foster peace, especially when the likelihood of conviction appears remote.

Result: The criminal proceedings against the petitioners were quashed.

Table of Content
1. overview of the case facts including marriage and allegations. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. petitioners seek quashing proceedings based on settlement. (Para 5 , 6)
3. compromise reached with assistance from elders. (Para 7)
4. analysis of whether prosecution should continue given settlement. (Para 10)
5. supreme court guidance on quashing based on settlements. (Para 11)
6. final order accepting the compromise and quashing proceedings. (Para 12 , 13)

ORDER :

(VENKATESH NAIK T., J.)

Learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 – State, and the learned counsel for respondent No.2, along with their respective parties, are present before the Court.

2. The petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 4 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) seeking quashing of the entire proceedings in C.C. No.4040/2022, pending on the file of the learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC at Koppal. The said case arises out of Crime No.56/2022 registered by the Koppal Women Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 506 , 498A, 504, and 323 read with Section 149 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (‘IPC’) and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

3. The sum and substance of the complaint is that respondent No.2 has alleged that petitioner No.1 is her husband, petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are his parents, and petitioner Nos.4 and 5 are his brothers. The marriage between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 was solemnized on 06.12.2020 in accordance with the customs and traditions of their community. Both petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 are government servants employed in the Police Department. Initially, they lived together happily and a female child namely Aaradhy was born out of their wedlock. However, respondent No.2 later alleged that she was harassed by the parents and brothers of petitioner No.1 and subjected to life threats demanding dowry while she was five months pregnant. It is also alleged that petitioner No.1 physically and mentally harassed her and supported the acts of his family members. On 01.07.2022 at around 07:00 a.m., petitioner No.1 allegedly picked a quarrel, abused, and assaulted respondent No.2, stating that he married her only to facilitate a job transfer, and ultimately drove her out of the house. Based on her complaint, respondent No.1 – Police registered a case, and the present petition under Section 4 82 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking to quash the same.

4. It is not in dispute that petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 are husband and wife, and their marriage was solemnized on 06.12.2020. Both parties are working in the Police Department. After the marriage, respondent No.2 began residing with petitioner No.1 and they initially led a happy marital life, during which a female child was born. Subsequently, disputes arose between them, leading to the filing of the complaint by respondent No.2, which resulted in the registration of the FIR and later, the filing of a charge sheet in C.C. No.4040/2022.

5. However, with the intervention of elders and well-wishers from both families, the parties have amicably resolved their differences. Respondent No.2 has rejoined petitioner No.1 and they are currently leading a marital life together. Petitioner No.1 has taken her back voluntarily, with her free will and consent, and without any coercion or pressure. In view of the settlement, respondent No.2 has expressed her intention to withdraw the complaint and has no objection in allowing the present petition. Furthermore, she has stated that she will not seek any further reliefs or claims against petitioner No.1 or any of the other petitioners. Accordingly, they have filed compromise petition under Section 320 of Cr.P.C. The contents of compromise petition read as under:

“APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 320 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

1. The Petitioners filed this petition for quashing the entire proceedings in CC No. 4040/2022 pending on the file of learned Prl

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top