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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 13318

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
M.NAGAPRASANNA
SMT MAGDALENA R – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
CRL.P 12613/2023



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 12613 OF 2023 (482(Cr.PC) /

528(BNSS)-)

BETWEEN:

1. SMT MAGDALENA R AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS W/O SELVARAJ R/AT NO 368, KRISHNA REDDY LAYOUT, NEAR MOTHER THARESA SCHOOL, MARAGONDANAHALLI MAIN ROAD, T.C. PALYA, BANGALORE 560036

2. SRI WILFRED S AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS S/O SELVARAJ R/AT NO.32/33, KRISHNA REDDY LAYOUT, Digitally signed by MARAGONDANAHALLI MAIN ROAD, SUMA ANANDAPURA, BANGALORE 560036 Location:

HIGH COURT OF 3. SMT MARY SUDHA KARNATAKA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS W/O WILFRED S R/AT NO 32/33, KRISHNA REDDY LAYOUT, MARAGONDANAHALLI MAIN ROAD, ANANDAPURA, BANGALORE 560036

4. SMT MARY SOPHIA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS D/O SELVARAJ R/AT NO 32/33, KRISHNA REDDY LAYOUT, MARAGONDANAHALLI MAIN ROAD, ANANDAPURA, BANGALORE 560036 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MUNISWAMY GOWDA S G., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA K.R. PURAM POLICE STATION, K.R. PURAM BANGALORE 560036 REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU 560001

2. MRS SONIYA MARY AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, W/O ABRHAM R/AT CHITTE BUILDING, SUBASH NAGARA K.R. PURAM, BENGALURU 560036 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VINAY MAHADEVAIAH, HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1;

SRI. RAJESH GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.55363/2019 ON THE FILE OF X ACMM AT MAYO HALL BENGALURU CITY REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S.498-A R/W SEC.34 OF IPC AND SEC.3,4 OF DP ACT OF K.R.PURAM POLICE STATION, BENGLAURU.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

ORAL ORDER

The petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 5 are before the Court seeking the following prayer:-

"To quash the proceedings in C.C.No.55363/2019 on the file of the X Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Mayo Hall, Bengaluru City, registered for the offences punishable under Section 498(A) R/W 34 of IPC, and Section 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act of K.R. Puram Police Station, Bengaluru."

2. During the subsistence of the subject proceedings, the respondent No.2 and her husband/accused No.1, who were before the Family Court in M.C.No.2264/2018 have settled the dispute by drawing up certain terms of settlement.

3. The aforesaid settlement arrived at between the parties reads as follows:

"MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT UNDER SECTION 89 OF CPC READ WITH RULES 24 AND 25 OF THE KARNATAKA CIVIL PROCEDURE (MEDIATION) RULES, 2005.

The parties above named submit as follows:-

The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 10 (x) Divorce Act, 1954 for a decree of divorce against the Respondent.

I. The aforesaid petition was referred to mediation for resolving the dispute between the parties. In the course of mediation, the petitioner and the respondent along with their respective counsels have participated, identified each other and resolved their dispute and have agreed to the following terms and conditions:

1. Both the parties state that the petitioner and respondent are Christians by religion; their marriage was solemnized on 26.05.2005 at A.S.R Convention Hall, Banaswadi, Outer Ring Road, Horamavu, Near Channasandra Bridge, Bengaluru, as per Christian rites and rituals.

2. Due to Irreconcilable differences and incompatibility of temperaments, the petitioner and respondent have been living separately since January 2017. The efforts made by the elders, friends and well-wishers to resolve the differences between the parties did not yield any fruits. There is absolutely no chance of reunion amongst them. Hence, the petitioner and respondent have decided to get the marriage between themselves dissolved by a decree of divorce.

3. The parties state that they have a daughter by name Esha, aged about 16 years, presently under the care and custody of the respondent/mother and shall continue to be so in future for which the petitioner/father has no objection for the same.

4. The respondent/mother state that she has agreed

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