- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39310 CRL.P No. 13169 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 9140 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 13169 OF 2025 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9140 OF 2023 IN CRL.P No. 13169/2025 BETWEEN: SRI. VINAY BADIGGER S/O. VEERABHADRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT NO.586, "MANJUSHREE BUILDING", 52ND CROSS, 3RD BLOCK, NEAR MTR AND ASHA SWEETS, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 010. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ABHISHEK PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SHIVAPRASAD SHANTANAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA RAMAMURTHY POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA-560001. 2. SMT. BHAVYA N W/O VINAY, Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39310 CRL.P No. 13169 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 9140 of 2023 AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/AT. NO 92/1, 6TH CROSS, PULAKESHI ROAD, POST OFFICE ROAD, RAMAMURTHY NAGAR, BENGALURU-560016. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ANOOP KUMAR, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. K.L.SREENIVAS, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT DATED 27.02.2023 (ANNEXURE-A) AND FIRST INFORMATION REPORT BEARING NO.117/2023 DATED 27.02.2023 (ANNEXURE-B) AND ALL FURTHER INVESTIGATION IN CRIME NO.0117/2023 FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 498A, 504, 506 OF THE IPC 1860 AND SECTIONS 3 AND 4 OF THE D.P ACT 1961, PENDING ON THE FILE OF HON'BLE X ADDL.CMM, MAYOHALL AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER. IN CRL.P NO. 9140/2023 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. INDIRA W/O VEERABHADRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, 2. SRI. VEERABHADRAPPA S/O LATE RUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, 3. KUM. VIDYASHREE D/O VEERABHADRAPPA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING AT: NO.320, NEAR SDM COLLEGE, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39310 CRL.P No. 13169 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 9140 of 2023 HDUDA LAYOUT, SATTUR, DHARWAD - 580009. ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. ABHISHEK PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. GAURAV C PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA RAMAMURTHY NAGAR POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY, STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT BANGALORE-560001. 2. SMT. BHAVYA N W/O VINAY, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 92/1, 6TH CROSS, PULAKESHI ROAD, POST OFFICE ROAD, RAMAMURTHY NAGAR, BENGALURU CITY - 560016. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ANOOP KUMAR, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. K. L. SREENIVAS, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT DATED 27.02.2023 (ANNEXRUE-A) AND FIR BEARING CR.NO.117/2023 DATED 27.02.2023 (ANENXURE-B) REGISTERED BY RAMAMURTHY NAGAR P.S., FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A, 504, 506 OF IPC AND SEC.3, 4 OF D.P ACT 1961 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE X ADDL.CMM, MAYO HALL, BENGALURU AS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR FRESH MATTERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39310 CRL.P No. 13169 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 9140 of 2023 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER These two petitions are filed by the husband/accused No.1 in Crl.P.No.13169/2025 and by the in-laws in Crl.P.No.9140/2023. Both petitions seek quashing of the complaint dated 27.02.2023 and all further proceedings in Crime No.117/2023 registered by Ramamurthy Nagar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, which are presently pending before the Court of the X Additional CMM, Mayohall, Bengaluru. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners, while reiterating the grounds urged in the petitions, has drawn the attention of this Court to the fact that respondent No.2 – wife has instituted a petition for dissolution of marriage in M.C.No.2744/2023 against accused No.1 – husband. The said matter was referred to the Mediation Centre, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39310 CRL.P No. 13169 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 9140 of 2023 where the parties amicably resolved their disputes and entered into a settlement agreeing to dissolve the marriage. Pursuant to this, the Karnataka Mediation Centre drew up a Memorandum of Settlement under Section 89 CPC read with Rules 24 and 25 of the Karnataka Civil Procedure (Mediation) Rules, 2005. Under the settlement, the marriage was dissolved, visitation rights were conferred on the husband/accused No.1, and, as per Clause 9 of the settlement, the wife agreed to co- operate in securing quashing of the proceedings in Crime No.117/2023. 3. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 – complainant, however, submits that he has no instructions from his client and, despite best efforts, respondent No.2 has not communicated any instructions in the matter. 4. Before proceeding further, this Court deems it appropriate to extract the relevant terms of the settlement recorded in M.C.No.2744/2023. Paragraphs 2, 3 and 9 of - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39310 CRL.P No. 13169 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 9140 of 2023 the Memorandum of Settlement, which are material for the present proceedings, are reproduced below: 2. The parties state and admit that they are living separately as of 11.10.2022, due to irreconcilable differences and temperament incompatibility. The elders', friends', and well-wishers' efforts to mediate the parties' issues proved futile. There is no possibility of a reunion between them. The petitioner and respondent are aware that their marriage is irretrievably broken and that there is no hope of reconciliation in order to live a happy married life. As a result, the petitioner and respondent decided to dissolve their marriage by a decree of divorce. 3. Both the parties state that they have a female child, by name TVISHA VINAY BADIGER born on 10.04.2020 presently under the care and custody of the petitioner/mother continues to be so in future, for which respondent/father has no objection. The petitioner mother will be Custodian of the minor child for all purpose (school, college, passport etc.,) In the interest of well being of the child, However the respondent/father along with his parents can visit, the minor child be every 3rd Saturday from 12.00 pm to 3-00 to pm at Nayana Degula, 4th Floor, family court, Bangalore under the super vision of the mother with prior intimation to the petitioner/mother (8892389990) through watsapp of respondent (9902409017). - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39310 CRL.P No. 13169 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 9140 of 2023 9. In view of the settlement agreement arrived at between the parties that the petitioner has agreed to co- operate in closing/quashing the proceedings in Crime No.0117/2023 filed against the respondent and his family members for the offense punishable 3 & 4 of D.P. Act pending before 10th ACMM, Bengaluru. 5. On a careful consideration of the extracted portion of the Memorandum of Settlement recorded in M.C.No.2744/2023, it is evident from paragraph Nos.2 and 3 that the marriage between respondent No.2 – wife and the petitioner in Crl.P.No.13169/2025 – husband stands dissolved by mutual consent on account of irreconcilable differences and incompatibility of temperament. Both parties have categorically admitted before the Mediation Centre that they have been living separately since 11.10.2022 and that despite the intervention of elders, friends and well-wishers, all attempts at reconciliation proved futile. They have further acknowledged that their marriage has irretrievably broken down, leaving no possibility of reunion. It is on that basis that both parties agreed to dissolve their marriage by a decree of divorce. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39310 CRL.P No. 13169 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 9140 of 2023 6. Further, as recorded in paragraph No.3 of the settlement, the custody of the minor female child, Tvisha Vinay Badiger, born on 10.04.2020, has been entrusted to the petitioner-mother, to continue in her care and custody in future. The petitioner-father has expressly recorded his no-objection to the same. However, in recognition of the welfare and best interests of the child, visitation rights have been conferred on the petitioner, enabling him and his parents to meet the child on every third Saturday between 12.00 p.m. and 3.00 p.m. at Nayana Degula, Family Court Complex, Bengaluru, under the supervision of the mother and with prior intimation through the respective contact numbers noted in the settlement. 7. Most importantly, Clause 9 of the settlement categorically records that the wife – respondent No.2 has agreed to co-operate in closing/quashing the criminal proceedings initiated in Crime No.117/2023 against the husband and his family members for the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39310 CRL.P No. 13169 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 9140 of 2023 Prohibition Act. This undertaking was given voluntarily before the Mediation Centre and has culminated in a final decree of divorce, which has already conferred substantive rights upon respondent No.2 including dissolution of marriage and custodial rights over the minor child. 8. Though it is now brought to the notice of this Court that respondent No.2, despite being represented by counsel, has not extended consent before this Court for quashing of the proceedings, it cannot be overlooked that Clause 9 of the settlement is a binding term of compromise, duly recorded under Section 89 CPC read with the Karnataka Civil Procedure (Mediation) Rules, 2005. Having availed the benefit of settlement and dissolution of marriage, respondent No.2 is estopped from resiling from her undertaking to co-operate in quashing the criminal case. The compromise, being duly recorded and forming part of judicial proceedings, binds the parties, and respondent No.2 cannot now approbate and reprobate. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39310 CRL.P No. 13169 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 9140 of 2023 9. In these circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that continuation of the criminal proceedings in Crime No.117/2023, despite the dissolution of marriage and the comprehensive settlement reached between the parties, would amount to abuse of the process of law and would defeat the ends of justice. The object of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is precisely to secure justice and to prevent misuse of the process of the Court. When the substratum of the matrimonial dispute itself stands resolved and the parties have already parted ways with a decree of divorce, continuation of criminal prosecution would serve no fruitful purpose and would only perpetuate bitterness between the families. Therefore, this Court finds it a fit case to invoke its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings. 10. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following: - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39310 CRL.P No. 13169 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 9140 of 2023 ORDER (i) Both petitions are allowed. (ii) The complaint dated 27.02.2023 and all further proceedings in Crime No.117/2023 registered by Ramamurthy Nagar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, pending on the file of the X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayohall, Bengaluru, as against the petitioners in both matters, are hereby quashed. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15