The court allowed the compounding of offences under IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act due to a voluntary settlement between the parties, affirming the nature of the offences as compoundable.

DATED 08.04.2019 AS ANNEXURE A IN C.C.NO.7526/2019 ON THE FILE XXIV ACMM AT BENGALURU AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498-A, 342, 504 OF IPC AND SEC.3, 4, 6(2) OF DP ACT IN CR.NO.374/2018 BY ALLOWING THE ABOVE PETITION. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR REPORTING SETTLEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER The petitioner are before this Court with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.7526/2019 pending before the Court of XXIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru arising out of Cr.No.374/2018 registered by Yeshwanthapura Police Station, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Section 498A, 342 and 504 read with 34 of IPC and Sections 3, 4 and 6(2) of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondent submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled before the Mediation Centre, Bengaluru and the terms of settlement was reduced under a memorandum of settlement dated 02.12.2023, which was submitted before the jurisdictional family Court in MC.No.4923/2022 C/w MC.No.4169/2019. They submit that pursuant to the settlement arrived between the parties, the marriage between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 is already dissolved by a decree of divorce. In paragraph Nos.5, 6 and 7 of the memorandum of settlement dated 02.12.2023, it is averred as follows:

"5. The petitioner has agreed to withdraw/close/quash the proceedings filed against the respondent, which are as follows:

i.

C.C.No.7526/2019 pending before 24th ACMM, Bengaluru filed under Section 498-A, 506 of IPC R/W Section 3 & 4 of D.P.Act. ii. Crl.Misc.No.272/2022 pending before VI Addl.Prl.Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru. RPFC.No.111/2022 pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru filed against Crl.Misc.115/2019. 6. The respondent has agreed to withdraw M.C.No.4169/2019 pending before this Hon'ble Court filed against the petitioner.

7. The petitioner can collect the household articles given by her at the time of the marriage at the respondent's house."

3. The parties have filed an application under Section 482 read with 320 of Cr.P.C ., which is supported by the joint affidavit of the parties. In the application prayer is made to permit the parties to compound the offences for which the petitioners are chargesheeted. In paragraph No.3 and 4 of the application filed under Section 482 read with 320 of Cr.P.C . it has been stated as follows:

"3] That the Respondent No.2 - wife had filed a petition of Divorce in M.C.No.4923/2022 before the IV Additional Family Court at Bangalore against the 1st Petitioner. In the said proceedings, the dispute between the Respondent No.2- wife and the 1st Petitioner was settled before the mediation by filing a joint compromise petition in lieu the 1st Petitioner had paid a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- by way of D.D.No.177920 dated 05.12.2023 drawn on Karnataka Bank as a full and final settlement. In the Compromise Petition, the Respondent No.2

wife had agreed to withdraw/close/quash the proceedings against the 1st Petitioner in C.C. No.7526/2019 pending on the file of XXIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Bangalore.

4] Hence, the Petitioners prays that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant permission to compound the offence against the Petitioners by acquitting in C.C.No.7526/2019 pending on the file of XXIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Bangalore."

4. The parties who are present before the Court in person are identified by their learned advocates and respondent No.2 acknowledges receipt of amount of Rs.15,00,000/- as stated in paragraph No.3 of the application filed before this Court. In view of the settlement arrived between the parties, the marriage between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 is already dissolved and the parties have decided to give quietus to all the dispute between themselves. The parties who are present before the Court have stated that the s