- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:17347 CRL.P No. 8593 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8593 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. VINOD KUMAR V S/O. VIJAYA KUMAR AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, 2. VIJAYA KUMAR S/O LATE KADIRIVELU AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, 3. HEMAVATHI W/O. VIJAYA KUMAR AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, ALL THE PETITIONERS ARE RESIDING AT NO.2-501, VINAYAKANAGAR, KIRIKERA, HINDUPUR, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, ANDRA PRADESH-515 211. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PRAKASH RAO JADHAV V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH RAMAMURTHY NAGAR P S BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE-560 001. 2. SMT. VINAYA B W/O VINOD KUMAR.V Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:17347 CRL.P No. 8593 of 2024 AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT NO.330, MAHAGANAPAHI, SANNIDHI ROAD, VINAYAKANAGAR, DEVASANDRA, KRISHNARAJAPURAM, BENGALURU - 560 036. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAHUL RAI K, HCGP FOR R1; SMT. RACHANA M, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482(FILED U/S.528 BNNS) CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ENTIRE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF OFFENCE U/S.498-A,34 OF IPC IN C.C.NO.60515/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE X ACMM AT MAYO HALL BENGLAURU CITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER Learned counsel accepts notice for the respondent No.1-State. Smt. Rachana M., learned advocate files vakalat on behalf of respondent No.2 and the same is placed on record. 2. Petitioners who are sought to be prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 498A r/w 34 of IPC are before this Court seeking relief. 3. The prosecution alleges that, accused No.1 husband, accused Nos.2 and 3 parents-in-laws subjected the defacto-complainant to cruelty, both mentally and physically. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:17347 CRL.P No. 8593 of 2024 4. Parties are present before this Court and the petitioner-accused No.1 has annexed a copy of the memorandum of settlement under Section 89 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 r/w Rules 24 and 25 of the Karnataka Civil Procedure (Mediation) Rules, 2005. 5. Perusal of the memorandum of settlement discloses that, accused No.1 had filed a petition under Section 13(1) (i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act in M.C.No.2911/2021 for dissolving his marriage with the defacto complainant, and the matter was referred to the Mediation Centre, Bengaluru. The accused No.1 and the defacto-complainant, before the Mediation Centre agreed to dissolve their marriage mutually, and in terms of the settlement their marriage has been dissolved mutually, and the petitioner-accused No.1 has paid a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- towards permanent alimony to the defacto- complainant, out of which Rs.4,00,000/- is already paid before the Family Court and Rs.2,00,000/- is paid by way of Demand Draft before this Court to the respondent No.2 who is present before this Court and she acknowledges the same subject to realisation, and the defacto complainant has agreed to withdraw all the allegations and has no objection for quashing the impugned proceedings against the petitioners-accused herein. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:17347 CRL.P No. 8593 of 2024 6. Though the offences alleged against the petitioners–accused are cognizable and non- compoundable, however, having regard to the fact that the parties have amicably resolved the dispute among themselves, and the marriage of the accused No.1 with the defacto complainant having been dissolved mutually and a permanent alimony of Rs.6 Lakh having been paid to the defacto- complainant, and the respondent No.2 having no objection for quashing the impugned proceedings, it would be a futile exercise, if the petitioners are subjected to trial, since the probability of their conviction is remote and bleak in view of the settlement. 7. 7. Therefore, the continuation of the criminal proceedings will be an abuse of process of law. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i) The petition is allowed; ii) The impugned proceedings in C.C. No.60515/2023 pending on the file of the X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru stands quashed. Pending I.A does not survive for consideration and stands disposed of. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE HR, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 153