- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28246 CRL.P No. 6895 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6895 OF 2022 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SHAJI MADHUSOODANAN S/O P R MADHUSOODANAN AGED ABUOT 42 YEARS AT EMC SOFTWARE AND SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD BAGMANE WORLD TECHNOLOGY CENTER MAHADEVAPURA, BENGALURU -560 048 (AS PER TRIAL COURT RECORD) R/AT FLAT 4263 PRESTIGE GULMOHAR APARTMENTS HORAMAVU MAIN ROAD HORAMAVU, BENGALURU -560043 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SIJI MALAYIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DHANYA GANAPATHY D/O N GANAPATHY AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS 2. KUM NIKITA NAMBIAR D/O SHAJI MADHUSOODANAN AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS, SINCE MINOR REP BY RESPONDENT NO.1 Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28246 CRL.P No. 6895 of 2022 R/AT NO.T4, ITTINA RRV APARTMENT 2ND CROSS, RRV LAYOUT, BEHIND BATA SHOWROOM RAMAMURTHYNAGAR, BANGALORE-560016 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.PRAMILA NESARGI, SR.COUNSEL FOR SRI. BINDU U, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2 MINOR, REPRESENTED BY R1) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN PETITION FILED U/S 125 OF CR.P.C. IN CRL.MISC.NO.529/2017 PENDING BEFORE THE LEARNED III ADDITIONAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU AND ALLOW THE PRESENT PETITION. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI ORAL ORDER In this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, petitioner who is the husband of respondent No.1 and father of respondent No.2 has challenged the proceedings initiated against him under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, by respondent seeking maintenance in a sum of ₹1,00,000/- per month and ₹1,00,000/- towards proceeding expenses. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28246 CRL.P No. 6895 of 2022 2. In support of the petition, the petitioner has contended that the proceeding initiated against him under Section 125 Cr.P.C is not maintainable. In the light of the fact that permanent alimony is granted in MC.No.4540/2016, it amounts to double Jeopardy. Since Hindu marriage Act is a special enactment and substantive law, setting the provisions relating to marriage and marriage disputes, it would prevail over Cr.P.C, which is procedural law. Since the issue of alimony is already decided by the Family Court, once again, it cannot be re- opened and as such the proceedings are liable to be quashed. 3. On the other hand learned counsel representing the respondents filed the statement of objections stating that the petition is not maintainable. The petitioner has not approached the Court with clean hands. The stage of the case is for evidence. The Family Court has decided the dispute with regard to divorce, custody of respondent No.2 and permanent alimony. However, it is challenged by the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28246 CRL.P No. 6895 of 2022 petitioner in MFA.No.5408/2022 and MFA.No.5415/2022. Similarly, respondent has also filed MFA.No.3928/2022. Petitioner has not disclosed these facts in the present petition and secured stay of the maintenance proceedings. He has not paid the permanent alimony. Without any alternative respondents have filed petition Under Section 125 of Cr.P.C, seeking maintenance. Petitioner has got it stayed and pray to dismiss the petition. 4. It is not in dispute that the marriage of petitioner and respondent was solemnised on 08.04.2006 and registered on 21.04.2006. Through the wedlock, they are having a daughter who is respondent No.2. Ultimately, respondent No.1 applied for divorce in MC.No.4540/2016. Petitioner filed petition for restitution of conjugal rights in MC.No.1901/2017. He also filed G&WC.No.331/2016 seeking guardianship and permanent custody of respondent No.2. Respondent No.1 filed G&WC.No.293/2017 for the same relief. Petitioner filed Misc.No.29/2021 under Order 39 Rule 2A of CPC, seeking - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28246 CRL.P No. 6895 of 2022 interim custody/visitation rights and communication rights of respondent No.2. 5. After full fledged trial, the Family Court allowed MC.No.4540/2016 and G&WC.No.293/2017 filed by respondent No.1, granting a decree of divorce and custody of respondent No.2 to respondent No.1. It also granted permanent alimony of ₹50 lakhs to respondent No.1. 6. The Family Court dismissed MC.No.1901/2017 filed by the petitioner for restitution of conjugal rights. It partly allowed G&WC.No.331/2017 filed by petitioner granting only visitation rights. 7. However, the judgment and decree passed by the Family Court is challenged by the petitioner in MFA.No.5408/2022 and MFA.No.5415/2022. Similarly, respondent has also filed MFA.3928/2022. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28246 CRL.P No. 6895 of 2022 8. It is submitted by the learned counsel for respondents that petitioner has not paid any amount towards the permanent alimony of respondent No.1. 9. As evident from the common order passed by the Family Court, the permanent alimony of ₹50 lakhs is granted in favour of respondent No.1. There is no order for grant of any maintenance in favour of respondent No.2, who is the minor daughter of petitioner and respondent No.1. Therefore, petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C is perfectly maintainable. So long as petitioner fails to pay the permanent alimony to respondent No.1, petition filed by her under Section 125 CRPC is also maintainable. As a husband and father respectively of respondents, petitioner is duty bound to maintain them. Of course, during the trial in the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C, petitioner is at liberty to take any defence available under law. However, he cannot seek quashing of the said proceedings. In the result, petition fails and accordingly the following: - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28246 CRL.P No. 6895 of 2022 ORDER (i) Petition filed by the petitioner/husband under Section 482 Cr.P.C is hereby rejected. (ii) The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial Court through e-mail. Sd/- (J.M.KHAZI) JUDGE RR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34