Karnataka High Court
Kum Rajeshwari vs Sri Sachin Subramani Mane on 6 March, 2019
Author: Aravind Kumar
Bench: Aravind Kumar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5666/2018
BETWEEN:
KUM. RAJESHWARI
D/O SRI. V. SRIDHAR
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
RESIDING AT SHAMBHAVI P.G
OPP. TO INDIRA CANTEEN
MARUTI NAGAR, MADIVALA
BENGALURU - 560 068.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. YUGANDHAR J., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. ARUN B.K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. SACHIN SUBRAMANI MANE
S/O LATE SRI. ISHWAR RAO MANE
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.2, 4TH MAIN
HOSAPALYA BOMMANAHALLI
BENGALURU - 560 068.
2. THE STATE
THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR
OF POLICE
MADIWALA POLICE STATON
MADIWALA, BENGALURU
REPRESENTED BY OFFICER
THE LEARNED SPECIAL PUBLIC
2
PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT
OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE - 01.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. ABHISEK K., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. K. DIWAKARA., ADVOCATE FOR R-1;
SRI. S. RACHAIAH., HCGP FOR R-2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR AND
COMPLAINT IN CRIME NO.190/2018 OF MADIVALA
POLICE, PENDING BEFORE THE III ACMM, AT
BANGALORE IN RESPECT OF THE OFFENCES P/U/S
493, 420 AND 417 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Petitioner - complainant has filed this petition for quashing of FIR and complaint registered in Crime No.190/2018 by Madivala Police Station against respondent-accused pending on the file of III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 493, 420 and 417 IPC.
2. Petitioner lodged a complaint on 04.05.2018 with Madivala Police alleging that 3 respondent-accused had contacted her through dating app and later on, they became close to each other and he has addressed her as his wife and assured her to marry her and has also indicated this fact in the social media and on account of faith built and assurance given by the respondent that he would marry her, they entered into physical relationship and subsequently, he started blocking her and again, relationship was built and in May, 2018, he assured her that he would marry her and on such re- assurance, they had physical relationship and thereafter he completely avoided her. Hence, alleging that with an intention to have physical relationship with her, he had made false promises, complaint came to be lodged by the complainant and it came to be registered in Crime No.190/2018 for the offences aforesaid. For quashing of said proceedings, petitioner - complainant herself is before this Court.
3. A compromise petition has been filed on 29.10.2018 along with affidavit of respondent No.1 - 4 accused. In the compromise petition, it is stated that as per the terms and conditions mentioned therein, they have amicably settled their differences/disputes. The terms and conditions so agreed reads:
"(i) The Petition and the
Respondent have fully and
completely settled the disputes which may have been between them till today and no one would have any claim or qualm over/against the other pursuant to the compromise effected in the above matter.
(ii) Having regard to the above, neither the Petitioner nor the Respondent No.1 shall initiate or continue any legal proceedings against each other pursuant to the compromise effected in the above matter."
4. Petitioner as well as respondent No.1 are present before Court. Learned Advocates appearing for both parties have identified the parties present before Court and they have also affixed their signatures to the compromise petition. They have also filed a memo enclosing proof of identity namely, 5 photocopies of the identity cards issued by the statutory authorities. Same is placed on record.
5. Petitioner-complainant who is present before Court submits that she voluntarily intends to withdraw the complaint keeping her future in mind and she intends to pursue her career and as such, she has no objection for proceedings being quashed.
6. Though terms and conditions agreed to under the compromise petition does not specify as to what the terms are, the fact remains that petitioner and respondent No.1 are not having any claims against each other and both parties have agreed that they would put an end to their dispute and pursue their career. In that view of the matter, this Court finds no impediment to accept the compromise petition.
7. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) Criminal petition is hereby allowed. 6
(ii) Proceedings pending against respondent No.1 in Crime No.190/2018 on the file of III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 493, 417and 420 IPC is hereby quashed and respondent No.1 is acquitted of the said offences.
SD/-
JUDGE *sp