Anil Madan vs The State of Karnataka

A.N. Venugopal Gowda, J.—Sri A. Dharmesh, learned advocate entered appearance for respondent No. 2. He filed an affidavit of respondent No. 2 and submitted that respondent No. 2 has entered into a settlement with the petitioners.

Petitioners and respondent No. 2 are present before the Court. They are identified by their learned advocates. Both parties, through their learned advocates, submitted that the disputes which arose out of the matrimonial matters have been amicably settled and they may be permitted to compound the offences, which are the subject matter in C.C. No. 10614/2014, pending on the file of the VI Additional C.M.M., Bengaluru.

A complaint having been filed by respondent No. 2, case in Crime No. 132/2012 was registered by respondent No. 1, against the petitioners, for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 504 and 506 of IPC r/w Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. After investigation, final report having been submitted, cognizance was taken and C.C. No. 10614/2014 was registered on the file of the VI Additional C.M.M., Bengaluru. Seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case, this petition was filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

In the affidavit of respondent No. 2, filed by Sri A. Dharmesh, her learned advocate, the parties have entered into a settlement in the following terms:

"a. That the 1st petitioner shall pay me a sum of Rs. 12,00,000/- (Rupees Twelve lakhs only) towards my permanent alimony. It is agreed that the said amount of Rs. 12,00,000/- (Rupees Twelve lakhs only) shall be paid by the 1st petitioner to me while signing the Memorandum of Settlement/compromise petition in MC No. 5006/2014 on the file of the 5th Addl. Family Judge at Bangalore.

b. In addition to this gold ornaments worth about Rs. 12,00,000/- (Rupees Twelve lakhs only) belonging to the 1st petitioner herein which is in my custody shall remain with me and the 1st petitioner shall not claim the same from me at any point of time. These ornaments shall be construed as additional permanent alimony to me.

c. I and the 1st petitioner are having a joint locker facility at Vijaya Bank, Shanthinagar Branch, Bangalore bearing Locker No. 190. There are several ornaments belonging to me and the 1st petitioner kept in the said locker. The Branch Manager of the Bank has taken inventory of the locker and has furnished a list of articles/ornaments kept in the said locker in C. Misc. No. 17/2013. Copy of the said list of articles/ornaments forms part of this affidavit. Out of the available ornaments as listed in the list of articles, I and the 1st petitioner have identified the articles belonging to me and the 1st petitioner respectively. Accordingly, item No. 1 to 8 and 10 to 14 of the said list belongs to me and the 1st petitioner or any of his family members have no claim over the same. Similarly, item No. 9 and 15 belongs to the 1st petitioner herein and I shall have no claim over the said items.

d. It is agreed that I shall co-operate with the petitioners herein in getting the criminal proceedings in Crime No. 132/2012 of Halasurugate Police now registered as criminal case in CC No. 10614/2014 pending before the VI Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore quashed/closed.

e. It is agreed between us that once the criminal case is closed/quashed, I and the 1st petitioner shall open the locker and in the presence of our respective advocates to take our respective ornaments as agreed and identified earlier. Once I take back my ornaments from the bank locker, I shall give a letter to the bank stating no objection for cancelling my name from the joint locker and the 1st petitioner shall be at liberty to operate the said locker in his individual name.

f. It is further agreed that I shall withdraw the proceedings in C. Misc. No. 17/2013 pending on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate, Traffic Court-V, Bangalore once I and the 1st petitioner take back our respective ornaments from the bank locker.

g. Since I have already filed a petition seeking a decree of divorce in MC No. 5006/2014 pending on the file of V Addl. Family Judge at Bangalore, we have decided to report settlement in the above terms before the family court and obtain a decree of divorce in the said proceedings.

h. It is agreed that apart from the above terms, either of us have no mutual claims against each other whatsoever."

Respondent No. 2 has filed M.C. No. 5006/2014 against the first petitioner, in the Court of the Principal Judge, V Additional Family Court, Bengaluru, to pass a decree of divorce and dissolve the marriage solemnized on 20.09.2011. She has filed Crl. Misc. No. 17/2013 and the same is pending on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate Traffic Court - V, Bengaluru. The mutually agreed amount - permanent alimony, has been agreed to be paid in M.C. No. 5006/2014, pending on the file of the V Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru.

In Jitendra Raghuvanshi and Others Vs. Babita Raghuvanshi and Another, , Apex Court has held that, criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint can be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., in appropriate cases, in order to meet the ends of justice and that Section 320 of Cr.P.C. does not limit or affect the powers of the Court even in non-compoundable offences pertaining to matrimonial disputes, where the Court is satisfied that the parties have settled the disputes amicably and without any pressure i.e., for the purpose of securing the ends of justice.

Respondent No. 2, when specifically asked, whether she is under any pressure to file the affidavit, through her learned advocate Sri A. Dharmesh and withdraw the case registered in Crime No. 132/2012, which lead to the registration of C.C. No. 10614/2014 by the VI Additional C.M.M., Bengaluru, she submitted that there is no pressure and she has entered into a settlement on her own free will and volition. Brother of respondent No. 2, by name Gautham Mallik, is also present before the Court along with respondent No. 2.

Since the parties have entered into an amicable settlement and as I am satisfied that there is no pressure on respondent No. 2, to withdraw C.C. No. 10614/2014, the parties are permitted to compound the offences, which are the subject matter of consideration in the aforesaid criminal case.

In the result, this petition is allowed and the entire proceedings in C.C. No. 10614/2014, on the file of the VI Additional C.M.M., Bengaluru is quashed.