- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53628 CRL.P No. 6570 of 2024 C/W WP No. 19739 of 2024 WP No. 37412 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6570 OF 2024 C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 19739 OF 2024 (GM-RES) WRIT PETITION NO. 37412 OF 2025 (GM-RES) IN CRL.P No. 6570/2024 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. NANDHINI W/O NIRMAL KUMAR, D/O SHANKAR, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, 2. SRI SHANKAR S S/O LATE G. SADSHIVA CETEYAR, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, 3. GOWTHAM. S S/O SHANKAR, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, 4. SANGEETHA. S D/O SHANKAR, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, PETITIONERS NO.1 TO 4 ARE RESIDING AT NO.565/2, 14TH B MAIN ROAD H.M.T. LAYOUT, MATHIKERE BANGALORE NORTH, BANGALORE - 560 054 Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53628 CRL.P No. 6570 of 2024 C/W WP No. 19739 of 2024 WP No. 37412 of 2025 5. SRI MANJUNATH G. S/O LATE GOVINDARAJ, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O NO 69, LAVANYA NIVAS, 3RD D CROSS, NEAR PANCHAMUKI TEMPLE, SUBBANNAPALYA, BANGALORE NORTH, BANGALORE - 560 043. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MUNISWAMY GOWDA H., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE BY KODIGEHALLI P. S. YELAHANKA SUB-DIVISION, BANGALORE CITY, R/P BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001 2. SRI NIRMAL KUMAR S/O ANAND C, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT NO 63, 1ST CROSS, SIDDIVINAYAKA LAYOUT, VIDHYARANYAPURA POST, BANGALORE - 560 097 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAHUL RAI K., HCGP FOR R1 SRI. PRAVEEN R., ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR / CR.NO.213/2024 DATED 26.05.2024, REGISTERED BY THE KODIGEHALLI POLICE, YELAHANKA SUB-DIVISION, BANGALORE, FOR OFFENCE P/U/S 3(1)(r)(s) OF THE SC/ST (POA) AMENDMENT ORDINANCE - 2014 ACT AND 506, 504 R/W SEC 34 OF IPC AT ANNEXURE-A, PENDING ON THE FILE OF CCH-71 CITY COURT COMPLEX, BANGALORE CITY. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53628 CRL.P No. 6570 of 2024 C/W WP No. 19739 of 2024 WP No. 37412 of 2025 IN WP NO. 19739/2024 BETWEEN: 1. NIRMALA K W/O. ANAND C AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, 2. ANAND C S/O CHINNA SWAMY, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, PETITIONERS ARE R/AT NO. 63/1, SIDDIVINAYAKA LAYOUT, KODIGEHALLI, VIDHYARANYAPURA POST, BENGALURU - 560 097 ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PRAVEEN. R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS NORTH WOMEN POLICE STATION, REP.BY S.P.P, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. NANDHINI S W/O. NIRMAL KUMAR AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS R/AT NO. 14/86, 15TH 'C' CROSS, 8TH MAIN, MUTHYALANAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 054 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAHUL RAI K., HCGP FOR R1 SRI. H. MUNISWAMY GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 528 OF BNSS, 2023, PRAYING TO QUASH THE - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53628 CRL.P No. 6570 of 2024 C/W WP No. 19739 of 2024 WP No. 37412 of 2025 FIR IN CRIME NO.035/2024 REGISTERED BY R-1/NORTH WOMEN POLICE STATION FOR THE COMMISSION OF THE ALLEGED OFFENCES UNDER SECTION 498A AND 323 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3 AND 4 OF THE DP ACT ON THE FILE OF THE 32ND ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU, AGAINST THE PETITIONER. IN WP NO. 37412/2025 BETWEEN: 1. MR. NIRMAL KUMAR A S/O. ANAND C AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, PETITIONERS ARE R/AT NO. 63/1, SIDDIVINAYAKA LAYOUT, KODIGEHALLI, VIDHYARANYAPURA POST, BENGALURU - 560 097 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRAVEEN R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS NORTH WOMEN POLICE STATION, REP.BY S.P.P., HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. NANDHINI S W/O. NIRMAL KUMAR AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS R/AT NO. 14/86, 15TH 'C' CROSS, 8TH MAIN, MUTHYALANAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 054 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAHUL RAI K., HCGP FOR R1 SRI. H. MUNISWAMY GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2) - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53628 CRL.P No. 6570 of 2024 C/W WP No. 19739 of 2024 WP No. 37412 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 528 OF BNSS, PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET AND ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.18080/2025 FILED BY RESPONDENTS NO.1/NORTH WOMEN POLICE STATION FOR THE COMMISSION OF THE ALLEGED OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS 498A AND 323 OF I.P.C. AND SECTIONS 3 AND 4 OF THE D.P. ACT, ON THE FILE OF THE 32ND ADDTITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU VIDE ANNEXURES - A AND B AGAINST THE PETITIONER, IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER In W.P.No.37412/2025, Learned counsel Sri. H. Muniswamy Gowda has filed vakalath for respondent Nos.2, the same is taken on record. 2. These 3 petitions relates to the same parties, arising out of matrimonial dispute, wherein, it is submitted that the parties have resolved the differences - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53628 CRL.P No. 6570 of 2024 C/W WP No. 19739 of 2024 WP No. 37412 of 2025 and filed joint affidavit seeking to close the proceedings. Hence, with the consent of the learned counsel appearing on both sides, petitions are taken up for final disposal. 3. Crl.P.No.6570/2024 is preferred seeking to quash FIR in Crime No.213/2024, of Kodigehalli Police Station, Bengaluru City, registered for the offence Punishable under Section 506, 504 read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the SC/ST (POA) Amendment Ordinance Act, 2014. 4. W.P.No.19739/2024 and W.P.No.37412/2025 are preferred to quash the FIR in Crime No.35/2024 of North Women Police Station, Bengaluru City, and to consequentially quash the charge sheet and entire proceedings in C.C.No.18080/2025, which is pending on the file of 32nd Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, at Bengaluru, registered for the offence Punishable under Section 498A, 323 of IPC and Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53628 CRL.P No. 6570 of 2024 C/W WP No. 19739 of 2024 WP No. 37412 of 2025 5. The defacto complainant / respondent No.2 in Crime No.213/2024 is petitioner in W.P.No.37412/2025. Similarly the defacto complainant in Crime No.35/2024 is petitioner No.1 in Crl.P.No.6570/2024. The parties are present before the Court. Separate applications are filed under Section 320 read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C., along with joint affidavit of the parties. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the respective parties would submit that, before the Family Court at Bengaluru in M.C.No.7310/2025, the defacto complainants in each FIRs have filed a memorandum of petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for a consent decree of divorce. 7. It is submitted that a decree of divorce has been granted by the Family Court on 03.12.2025. A copy of the memorandum of petition is enclosed along with the application. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53628 CRL.P No. 6570 of 2024 C/W WP No. 19739 of 2024 WP No. 37412 of 2025 8. It is relevant to extract Clause 9 of the memorandum of settlement, which reads as under:- 9. The petitioner No.2 undertakes to withdraw the case registered against the petitioner No.1 in C.C. No.18080/2025 or cooperates with petitioner No.1 for quashing the said proceedings before Hon'ble High Court and The petitioner No.2 undertakes to withdraw the case registered against family members of the petitioner No.1 in crime No.35/2024, dated 27/05/2024 and the Petitioner No.2 undertakes to cooperate with petitioner No.1 for quashing the said proceedings in pending W.P. No.19739/2024 And the petitioner No.1 undertakes to withdraw the complaint registered against the petitioner No.2 and her family members in crime No.213/2024. dated 26/05/2024 and the Petitioner No.1 undertakes to cooperate with petitioner No.2 for quashing the said proceedings in pending Crl Pet No.6570/2014, both the petitioners have, in the mediation agreed to part ways and seek for dissolution of their marriage by filing the above petition for decree of divorce by mutual consent. Copies of the Aadhar Card of the petitioners is herein produced and marked as Document No.4 & 5.” 9. The parties are present before the Court and they have identified by the learned counsel appearing for them. The defacto complainant in both the cases would - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53628 CRL.P No. 6570 of 2024 C/W WP No. 19739 of 2024 WP No. 37412 of 2025 submit that the matter has been settled before the Mediation Centre, pursuant to which, they have mutually decided that they shall not interfere with the each others’ lives and they have no objection to quash the proceedings now initiated against each other. 10. The Hon'ble Apex Court in NARINDER SINGH AND OTHERS reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466 has held that when the parties have reached the settlement, and on that basis, petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to: i) secure ends of justice, or ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. Those criminal cases having overwhelming and predominantly civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transaction or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family dispute should be quashed when parties have resolved their entire dispute among themselves. 11. It is relevant to extract Para 9 and 10 of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Ramawatar v. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53628 CRL.P No. 6570 of 2024 C/W WP No. 19739 of 2024 WP No. 37412 of 2025 State of Madhya Pradesh reported in (2022) 13 SCC 635. “9. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties at some length, we are of the opinion that two questions fall for our consideration in the present appeal. First, whether the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution can be invoked for quashing of criminal proceedings arising out of a "non- compoundable" offence? If yes, then whether the power to quash proceedings can be extended to offences arising out of special statutes such as the SC/ST Act? 10. So far as the first question is concerned, it would be ad rem to outrightly refer to the recent decision of this Court in Ramgopal v. State of M.P. (2022) 14 SCC 531 : 2021 SCC Online SC 834, wherein, a two-Judge Bench of this Court consisting of two of us (N.V. Ramana, CJI g & Surya Kant, J.) was confronted with an identical question. Answering in the affirmative, it has been clarified that the jurisdiction of a court under Section 320 CrPC cannot be construed as a proscription against the invocation of inherent powers vested in this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution nor on the powers of the High Courts under Section 482 CrPC. It was further held that the touchstone for exercising the extraordinary powers under Article 142 or Section 482 CrPC, would be to do complete justice. Therefore, this Court or the High Court, as the case may be, after having given due regard to the nature of the offence and - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53628 CRL.P No. 6570 of 2024 C/W WP No. 19739 of 2024 WP No. 37412 of 2025 the fact that the victim/complainant has willingly entered into a settlement/compromise, can quash proceedings in exercise of their respective constitutional/inherent powers.” 12. The matter arises out of matrimonial dispute, wherein, the parties have resolved the entire dispute. They have filed the joint affidavit reporting settlement and to quash the proceedings pending before the trial Court. Hence, no useful purpose will be served in continuing the proceedings pending against the petitioner. In the interest of justice, it is just and proper to quash the proceedings. Accordingly, the following:- ORDER i) Petitions are allowed. ii) The entire proceedings in FIR / Crime No.213/2024, registered at Kodigehalli Police Station, Bengaluru City, and the FIR in Crime No.35/2024 of North Women Police Station, Bengaluru City, as well as the - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53628 CRL.P No. 6570 of 2024 C/W WP No. 19739 of 2024 WP No. 37412 of 2025 proceedings in C.C.No.18080/2025 on the file of the XXXII ACMM, Bengaluru are quashed. Applications are allowed. I.A.No.1/2025 filed in Crl.P.No.6570/2024 is disposed of. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE LDC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 88