- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20363 CRL.P No. 3388 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3388 OF 2026 BETWEEN: 1. SRI NAVEEN KUMAR S/O GOVINDARAJU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 97, BDA LAYOUT, 2ND BLOCK, ASHRAMA CROSS, ULLAL MAIN RAOD, JNANABHARATHINAGARA, BENGALURU-560 056. 2. SRI. GOVINDARAJU S/O LATE MARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 97, BDA LAYOUT, 2ND BLOCK, ASHRAMA CROSS, ULLAL MAIN RAOD, JNANABHARATHINAGARA, BENGALURU-560 056. 3. SMT. NEELAMMA W/O GOVINDARAJU, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 97, BDA LAYOUT, 2ND BLOCK, ASHRAMA CROSS, ULLAL MAIN RAOD, JNANABHARATHINAGARA, BENGALURU-560 056. Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20363 CRL.P No. 3388 of 2026 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. LOKESH S G., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE BY RAMANAGARA WOMEN P.S. RAMANARARA DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY STATE P.P. HIGHCOURT BUILDING, BENGALURU- 560 001. 2. SMT. ABHILASHA D/O RAJASHEKAR W/O NAVEEEN KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, RESIDING AT KAYISOPPINABEEDI, NEAR GANESHA TEMPLE, WARD NO.5, RAMANAGARA TOWN, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562159. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M R PATIL, HCGP FOR R1 SMT. PADMASHREE, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.1166/2021 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498(A),323,506 OF IPC AND OFFENCE P/U/S 3,4 OF D.P ACT WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE THE HON'BLE PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C RAMANAGARA. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20363 CRL.P No. 3388 of 2026 ORAL ORDER The captioned petition is filed by the husband and his parents seeking quashing of the proceedings pending in C.C.No.1166/2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 323, 506 and 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. 2. Today, this matter is moved by the counsel on record indicating that the matter is amicably settled in M.C.No.1568/2022. In terms of settlement, Family Court, Bengaluru in M.C.No.1568/2022 has dissolved the marriage and respondent No.2/complainant has taken a permanent alimony of Rs.8,75,000/-. 3. Respondent No.2 is present before this Court. On a specific query made by this Court as to whether the dispute inter se the parties has been amicably resolved, respondent No.2, in unequivocal terms, submits that the matrimonial dispute has culminated in dissolution of marriage and that she has received a sum of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20363 CRL.P No. 3388 of 2026 Rs.8,75,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Seventy-Five Thousand only) by way of demand draft towards full and final settlement. She would further submit that in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties in M.C.No.1568/2022, she has no objection for quashing of the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioners. 4. In the backdrop of settlement recorded in M.C.No.1568/2022, this Court is of the considered opinion that though certain offences alleged against the petitioners are non-compoundable in nature, the substratum of the dispute emanates from matrimonial discord, which now stands resolved by mutual consent. In such circumstances, continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law. This Court, therefore, deems it appropriate to exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to secure the ends of justice and to prevent abuse of process. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20363 CRL.P No. 3388 of 2026 5. Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is allowed; (ii) The proceedings pending in C.C.No.1166/2021 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Ramanagara, for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 323, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, are hereby quashed. (iii) It is made clear that the settlement arrived at between the parties shall form part of this order and the parties shall remain bound by the terms thereof. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE CA List No.: 2 Sl No.: 32