High CourtsSingle Bench

Vinayak B. Kale & Others vs State Of Karnataka & Others

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 15 April 2021 · Citation: (2021) 04 KAR CK 0073

HON’BLE JUDGES
H.P. Sandesh, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 320(1), 482 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 149, 323, 324, 341, 504, 506 · Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Section 89
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Petition No. 410 Of 2021
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

21 paragraphs · 420 words

H.P. Sandesh, J

1.

This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying this Court to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.579/2020 for the offence punishable under

Sections 341, 323, 324, 504 and 506 read with Section 149 of IPC on the file of IX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City.

2.

The factual matrix of the case is that respondent No.2 had lodged the complaint with the first respondent vide complaint dated 22.09.2019 that the

petitioners herein, who are the husband as well as their in-laws and other persons had assaulted her and her parents. Based on the complaint, the

police have registered the case for the above offences and thereafter investigated the matter and filed the charge sheet against the petitioners herein.

3.

Now the parties have filed an application under Section 320 (1) read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying the Court to permit them to compound the

offences invoked against them, as the matter has been settled among themselves on the advice of the well-wishers of the family. The parties have

also filed Annexure-D, which is a memorandum of settlement arrived at between the parties under Section 89 of CPC. In terms of the memorandum

of settlement, they have arrived for mutual settlement and an amount of Rs.3,75,000/- has been paid in total to the respondent No.2 and also returned

the gold ornaments. Now there is no dispute between the parties as already the divorce has been granted by the jurisdictional Court. In view of the

settlement arrived at between the parties and also in view of the principles laid down by the Apex Court in the case of GIAN SINGH V. STATE OF

PUNJAB reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, if the dispute between the parties is a matrimonial offence not affecting the society at large and inter se

between the parties, such offences can be compounded with the permission of the Court.

4.

In view of the discussion made above, I proceed to pass the following:-

ORDER

(i) The application filed under Section 320(1) read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed.

(ii) Consequently, the petition filed by the petitioners is allowed. The proceedings initiated against the petitioners in C.C.No.579/2020 on the file of IX

Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City, for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 504 and 506 read with Section 149

of IPC, are hereby quashed.

In view of the disposal of the main petition, I.A.No.1/2021 does not survive for consideration and the same stands disposed of.