- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46754 WP No. 24660 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ WRIT PETITION NO. 24660 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. B R RAGHU S/O. RAJAPPA B K AGE: 40 YEARS PERMANENT RESIDENT OF HONNEMARADIHALLI VILLAGE NEETHIGERE POST, CHANNAGIRI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT – 577 213. PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NO.110(S) 1ST FLOOR, 2ND CROSS, 3RD STAGE K.E.C COLONY, NEAR WATER TANK BASAVESHWARA NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 079. MOBILE: 9972414251. 2. RAJAPPA.B.K. S/O. LATE KALLAPPA AGE: 69 YEARS 3. VISHALAMMA W/O RAJAPPA AGE 64 YEARS PETITIONERS 2 AND 3 ARE PERMANENT RESIDENTS OF HONNEMARADIHALLI VILLAGE NEETHIGERE POST, CHANNAGIRI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT- 577 213. (PETITIONER NO.3 ACTUAL NAME IS VISHALAKSHAMMA) …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MANU.N.P, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46754 WP No. 24660 of 2025 AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA (BY VIJAYANAGAR POLICE STATION /WEST WOMEN POLICE STATION) (FORMERLY SHO, BASAVANAGUDI WOMEN POLICE), BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU – 560 001. 2. SMT. Y.K. SANDHYA RANI W/O B.R.RAGHU AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS PERMANENT RESIDENT OF 'SRI RANGA' DOOR NO. 1778/1A 1ST MAIN, 1ST CROSS, VINAYAKA BADAVANE NEAR VIDHYANAGAR PARK DAVANAGERE – 577 005. ALSO RESIDING AT DOOR NO. 392, 6TH MAIN ROAD 5TH CROSS, MEI LAYOUT HESARAGHATTA, BENGALURU – 560 088. CELL NO. 9945185578 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAHUL RAI K, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. RAJATH S, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. MAHESH R UPPIN, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO. 15553/2021 (CR. NO. 106/2020) REGISTERED BY THE BASAVANAGUDI WOMEN POLICE, JAYANAGAR SUB-DIVISION AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46754 WP No. 24660 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioners are seeking to quash the criminal proceedings in C.C No.15553/2021 pending before the XXIV ACJM, Bengaluru. 2. Charge sheet is filed against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 3. Heard Sri Manu N.P., learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri Rahul Rai K., learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1– State and Sri Rajath S., learned counsel for respondent No.2-defacto complainant and perused the material on record. 4. The dispute arises out of matrimonial discord. The respondent No.2 and petitioner No.1 have filed a petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Family Court, Davanagere, in M.C. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46754 WP No. 24660 of 2025 No.154/2024, seeking divorce by mutual consent. The Family Court has passed a decree dissolving the marriage. In that background, respondent No.2/defacto complainant is before this Court by filing an affidavit for withdrawing the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioners. 5. Petitioners and respondent No.2 are present before this Court. They are identified by their respective learned counsel. Respondent No.2 submits that she is not interested in proceeding with the matter any further and she has no objection to quash the proceedings. 6. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Jitendra Raghuvanshi and others v. Babita Raghuvanshi and another reported in 2013(2) Crimes 90(SC), has held that ‘the inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., are wide and unfettered. It is the duty of the Courts to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes, particularly, when the same are on considerable increase. Even if the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46754 WP No. 24660 of 2025 offences are non-compoundable, if they relate to matrimonial disputes and the Court is satisfied that, the parties have settled the same amicably and without any pressure, for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, Section 320 of the Code, would not be a bar to the exercise of power of quashing of FIR.’ 7. In B.S.Joshi and others V. State of Haryana and another reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675, the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that even though the provisions of Section 320 Cr.P.C., would not apply to such offences which are not compoundable, it did not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 8. In the light of the above, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings pending against the petitioners and it will be a futile exercise. The interest of justice demands that the dispute be set at naught. Taking into consideration the contents of the affidavit and in order to bring a quietus to the entire - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46754 WP No. 24660 of 2025 litigation, it is just and proper to quash the proceedings. Hence, the following:- ORDER (i) The Writ Petition is allowed. (ii) The entire criminal proceedings in C.C No.15553/2021 (Crime No.106/2020 registered by the Basavanagudi Women Police) pending before the XXIV ACJM, Bengaluru, are quashed. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE Bss List No.: 1 Sl No.: 93