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
| 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
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 p....
Compromise between parties can lead to quashing of criminal proceedings when continuation is considered an abuse of process, reflecting a mutual resolution of disputes.
Court allows party-initiated compromise under Section 482 Cr.P.C., quashing IPC charges, emphasizing the futility of trials post-settlement.
Offence can be compounded and quashed where chances of conviction are bleak and remote.
The High Court may quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 where parties have settled their dispute amicably, especially in cases with remote chances of conviction.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to prevent an abuse of the process of law and secure the ends of justice, especially in cases whe....
Criminal proceedings for serious offences like dowry death cannot be quashed on the grounds of compromise, as public interest necessitates accountability for heinous acts.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.