AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
K.N. Keshavanarayana, J.—In this petition filed u/s 482 of Cr.P.C., the petitioner arraigned as accused in C.C. No. 7174/2013 on the file of the VIII-Additional C.M.M., Bangalore, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 323 of IPC has sought for quashing the prosecution launched against him inter alia on the ground that no case for the aforesaid offences is made-out against him and that the prosecution launched is sheer abuse of process of the Court and is resulting in great hardship to him. Respondent No. 2 herein is the wife. She said to have lodged a report before the jurisdictional police, based on which case came to be registered and after investigation, charge sheet came to be filed. It is the contention of the petitioner that even during the pendency of the investigation, Respondent No. 2, the complainant, filed a further report to the effect that on 14.04.2012 counseling was done by the elders of both sides at Punganur, Chittur District, Andhra Pradesh, in which the petitioner herein being the husband, promised in the presence of the elders that he would look after her well without any kind of harassment and provide all amenities required by her and relying on such promise, she agreed to join her husband and children. Therefore, she sought for closure of the complaint filed by her and to drop the further proceedings. It is contended that, in spite of such request made by the 2nd respondent, the police have filed the charge sheet against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 323 of IPC. Therefore, the petitioner has presented this petition seeking to quash the prosecution.
Today, a petition u/s 320(1) and (8) of r/w. Section 482 of Cr.P.C. duly signed by the petitioner and Respondent No. 2 is filed stating that pursuant to the amicable settlement between the husband and wife, they have been residing together with their children for the last one year and in view of the same, no useful purpose would be served by continuing the prosecution launched against the petitioner and continuance of the prosecution would result in bringing disharmony in the matrimonial relationship of the parties. The 2nd respondent has appeared before the court in person. The court in order to ascertain the identity of the person who appeared before the court as 2nd respondent, perused the passport of the 2nd respondent herein and on that basis this court is satisfied about the identity of the person. Respondent No. 2, who is present before the Court submits that she has been residing with the petitioner for the last one year along with their children and she is being looked after by the petitioner properly without any kind of harassment either mentally or physically and she wants the prosecution launched against the petitioner to be closed.
In the light of the further development and in view of the fact that the petitioner and the 2nd respondent are living together under one roof with their children, no useful purpose would be served by continuing the prosecution launched against the petitioner and the continuance of the prosecution would certainly bring-out disharmony in the matrimonial relationship of the petitioner and the 2nd respondent. Therefore, it is just and proper to quash the prosecution. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. The prosecution launched against the petitioner in C.C. No. 7174/2013 on the file of VIII-Additional C.M.M., Bangalore, is hereby quashed.