Karnataka High Court
Abubakar Siddiq And Ors vs State Of Karnataka & Anr on 14 August, 2019
1 CRL.P.No.200535/2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL
CRIMINAL PETITION No.200535/2018
BETWEEN:
1. Abubakar Siddiq
S/o Mohammed Mohsin
Aged about 27 years
Occ: Private Service
2. Humera Unnisa
D/o Mohammed Mohsin
Aged about 45 years
Occ: Household
3. Abdul Mohsin
S/o Mohammed Jabbar
Aged about 50 years
Occ: Private Service
4. Jabeen Amreen W/o Nazeer
Aged about 21 years
Occ: Household
5. Nazera Kulsum
W/o Mohammed
Aged about 19 years
Occ: Household
All R/o No.17-6-464
Jabbar Hotel, Dabeerpura
2 CRL.P.No.200535/2018
Hyderabad, Telangana State
... Petitioners
(By Sri Ameet Kumar Deshpande, Advocate)
AND:
1. State of Karnataka
Represented by its PSI
Sadar Bazar Police Station
Raichur East Circle
Raichur-584 101
2. Ayesha Mubarak
W/o Md. Abubakar Siddique
Aged about 28 years
Occ: Household
R/o H.No.12-12-68
Arab Mohalla, Raichur-584 101
... Respondents
(By Sri Mallikarjun Sahukar, HCGP for R1;
R2 served and unrepresented)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C., praying to allow the petition and quash the entire
proceedings pending before the JMFC-II, Raichur, in
C.C.No.4656/2015, true copy of which is at Annexure-D,
arising out of Crime No.124/2015 of Sadar Bazar Police
Station, Raichur East Circle, Raichur, for the alleged
offences punishable under Sections 498A and 506 IPC r/w
Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, the copy of FIR is
at Annexure-A and to pass any other appropriate orders as
may be deemed necessary in the facts and circumstances of
the case.
This petition is coming on for Admission, this day, the
Court made the following:
3 CRL.P.No.200535/2018
ORDER
"Whether continuation of the proceedings in C.C.No.4656/2015 on the file of JMFC-II, Raichur, amount to abuse of process of the Court?" is the question involved in this case.
2. C.C.No.4656/2015 was initiated on the basis of the charge sheet filed by Sadar Bazar Police Station, Raichur, in Crime No.124/2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 506, 504 IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Crime No.124/2015 was registered against the petitioners on the basis of the complaint of the second respondent.
3. The marriage of the second respondent with the first petitioner was solemnized on 04.06.2013 at Hyderabad. Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are the parents and petitioner Nos.4 and 5 are the sisters of first petitioner. The first petitioner and the second respondent had 4 CRL.P.No.200535/2018 troubled marriage. The second respondent filed complaint before the first respondent-Police contending that petitioners subjected her to physical and mental cruelty in connection with their demand for dowry and on 27.05.2015 at 5.00 p.m., they assaulted her in her parental house and threatened to kill her if she fails to withdraw the case filed by her in the Court and divorce the first petitioner.
4. On the basis of the said complaint, the first respondent-Police registered the case in Crime No.124/2015, conducted investigation and chargesheeted the petitioners as aforesaid. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offences against the petitioners and summoned them to take up the trial.
5. The petitioners filed Criminal Petition No.200294/2016 before this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking quashing of the proceedings in C.C.No.4656/2015. This Court vide order dated 5 CRL.P.No.200535/2018 21.03.2016 dismissed the said petition holding that, at that stage, there was no ground for interference.
6. The second respondent had filed Criminal Miscellaneous No.23/2016 under Section 125 Cr.P.C., before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Raichur, against the first petitioner claiming maintenance. The family Court awarded maintenance of Rs.15,000/- per month. She filed Criminal Miscellaneous No.205/2017 before the Family Court, Riachur, under Section 125(3) Cr.P.C., r/w Section 128 Cr.P.C., for recovery of the maintenance awarded.
7. The second respondent had also filed Criminal Miscellaneous No.233/2015 against the petitioners under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act claiming various reliefs.
8. Annexures-E and E1 are the copies of the memo filed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.205/2017. 6 CRL.P.No.200535/2018 Anexure-E2 is the certified copy of the order sheet in Criminal Miscellaneous No.205/2017 which shows that the second respondent settled the matter with the first petitioner receiving Rs.1,25,000/- in full settlement of her claim towards alimony. On such memo of the second respondent, the Court closed the proceedings in Criminal Miscellaneous No.205/5017 on 26.03.2018.
9. In those memos, it is stated that, as a result of the settlement between the parties, they agreed to get dissolved their marriage under Khulanama. Ex.E1 the copy of the memo indicates that along with the memo Xerox copy of the khula deed and certificate issued by the Khazi of Raichur were produced before the Family Court.
10. Annexure-F copy of Khulanama dated 23.03.2018 shows that the parties agreed to close all the civil and criminal proceedings between them. Khulanama dated 23.03.2018 is also referred to in the 7 CRL.P.No.200535/2018 memo Annexure-E1. Annexure-G certified copy of the order sheet in Criminal Miscellaneous No.233/2015 shows that, on 23.01.2018 the said petition was dismissed for non-prosecution as there was no representation for the aggrieved person/present second respondent.
11. The grievance of the petitioners is that having accepted the amount towards permanent alimony, in violation of her undertaking to withdraw all civil and criminal proceedings, the second respondent is not turning up in C.C.No.4656/2015 to report settlement. It is the contention of the petitioners that in view of the aforesaid developments subsequent to the disposal of their earlier petition by this Court on 21.03.2016, continuation of the proceedings against them amount to abuse of process of Court and failure of ends of justice.
12. The above referred documents clearly show that the second respondent settled the matter with the 8 CRL.P.No.200535/2018 petitioners accepting the permanent alimony and she also undertook not to pursue any civil or criminal proceedings against the petitioners. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another (2012) 10 SCC 303 held that certain offences which overwhelmingly and predominatingly bear civil flavor having arisen out of matrimony particularly relating to dowry etc., or family disputes, if settled between the parties amicably, can be quashed to serve the ends of justice.
13. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajiv Thapar and others vs. Madan Lal Kapoor 2013(3) SCC 330 held that where the material relied upon by the accused is not refuted by the prosecution/complainant and the said material is sound and reasonable and over-rule the factual assertions, proceeding with the trial in such cases results in abuse of process of Court and the High Court exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., can 9 CRL.P.No.200535/2018 quash those proceedings. It was held that such quashing of proceedings besides doing justice to the accused would save precious time of the Court when it is clear that the same would not conclude in the conviction of the accused.
14. Having regard to the aforesaid judgments and facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that continuation of impugned proceedings do not serve the ends of justice and amount to abuse of process of Court. Therefore, the petition is allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No.4656/2015 on the file of Principal JMFC-II, Raichur, are hereby quashed.
In view of disposal of the petition, pending I.A., stands disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE NB*