K.E. Prabhu vs State of Karnataka

S.N. Satyanarayana, J.—Crl. P. No. 6762/2012 is filed by accused No. 1 and Crl. P. No. 3205/2011 is filed by accused Nos. 2 to 4 in C.C. No. 9010/2011 which is registered pursuant to complaint registered in Crime No. 61/2010 by Ulsoorgate Women''s Police Station, pending on the file of VI ACMM Court, Bangalore.

Admittedly second respondent herein is the wife of petitioner in Crl. P. No. 6762/2012 and the complaint is registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 506 of IPC. The petitioners in Crl. P. No. 3205/2011 are two sisters and brother-in-law of 1st accused-husband. It is also an admitted fact that the marriage between petitioner, K.E. Prabhu and second respondent, Bharati K, took place on 28.09.2009 and thereafter difference arose between them, which has resulted in common second respondent-wife filing a complaint on 19.10.2010 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 506 of IPC. Subsequently it is also seen that the petition is filed by the wife in M.C. No. 371/2011 under Sections 13(1) & 1(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act.

The said proceeding was subsequently referred to mediation wherein it is seen that a settlement is arrived at between the parties pursuant to which, Memorandum of Settlement is filed u/s 89 of CPC read with Rules 24 and 25 of the Karnataka Civil Procedure (Mediation) Rules, 2005. There is no consummation of marriage, there are no issues and that in the settlement no monetary benefits were sought by the wife and given by the husband. On mutual terms the allegations are withdrawn and the petition which is filed in M.C. No. 371/2011 came to be disposed of dissolving the marriage between the parties in terms of settlement. One of the terms of settlement is that the second respondent shall withdraw all the allegations made against her husband in criminal case in CC. No. 9010/2011 pending on the file of VI ACMM Court, Bangalore. Accordingly both the parties through their respective counsel submit that in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, the petitions may be closed.

This day, the second respondent-wife is present in person. So far as the petitioner in Crl. P. No. 6762/2011 and petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 in Crl. P. No. 3205/2011 being not able to present before this Court, have filed application seeking exemption from their personal appearance, which is taken on record. Accordingly the said application is allowed and petitioner in Crl. P. No. 6762/2011 and petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 in Crl. P. No. 3205/2011 are exempted from their personal appearance before this Court. On going through the memorandum of settlement, it is seen that the dispute between the parties is amicably settled.

Since the offences alleged against the petitioners being non compoundable in nature, under normal circumstances, the settlement cannot be accepted. However, in the light of the Judgment rendered by the Apex Court in the matter of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another, , since the offences alleged against the petitioners not being heinous, rape, murder, dacoity and since the offences are with reference to the matrimonial dispute between the wife and husband, settlement arrived at between the parties is accepted. Accordingly both the petitions are allowed. The proceedings in C.C. No. 9010/2011 pending on the file of VI ACMM Court, Bangalore, is hereby quashed.