Karnataka High Court
Vishwanath Nagappa Katti vs State Of Karnataka on 6 September, 2022
-1-
CRL.P No. 102449 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102449 OF 2022 (482-)
BETWEEN:
1. VISHWANATH NAGAPPA KATTI,
AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE,
R/O. MUKKAL VILLAGE,
KALGHATGI, DHARWAD-581204.
2. NAGAPPA YALLAPPA KANAKAPPANAVAR,
AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. MUKKAL VILLAGE,
KALGHATGI, DHARWAD-581204.
...ACCUSED NO.1 & 4/PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. R. M. JAVED., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH DHARWAD WOMEN P.S.
REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
ANNAPURNA
CHINNAPPA
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DANDAGAL
BENCH AT DHARWAD-580105.
Digitally signed by
ANNAPURNA
CHINNAPPA DANDAGAL
Location: HIGH COURT
OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH,
2. REKHA ANNAPPA DODAWAD
DHARWAD.
AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: TEACHER ,
R/O. MISHRIKOTI VILLAGE,
KALGHATI TALUK, DHARWAD-581204.
...COMPLAINANT/RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1)
(BY SRI. K. B. GUDIHAL., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
-2-
CRL.P No. 102449 of 2022
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., TO
QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS SO FAR AS THE PETITIONERS
ARE CONCERNED (ACCUSED NO.1 AND 4) REGISTERED WITH
KALGHATGI P.S. CRIME NO.50/2020 (NOW S.C. NO.76/2021) FOR
THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 376, 417, 504, 506
READ WITH 34 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF IV ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Petitioners who are arraigned as accused Nos.1 and 4 have invoked the provisions of Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, (for short "Cr.P.C") seeking quashing of entire proceedings in Crime No.50/2020 (S.C. No.76/2021 on the file of IV Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad) for the offences punishable under Section 376, 417, 504 and 506 r/w. Section 34 of IPC.
2. They have contended that complainant i.e., respondent No.2 herein filed a complaint alleging that petitioner No.1 who is working as F.D.A in the office of BEO Kalaghatagi, sexually assaulted her on 26.04.2020 at 2:00 pm, at his house with a promise to marry her. After -3- CRL.P No. 102449 of 2022 some time difference of opinion arose between them. When she visited the house of accused No.1 the remaining accused persons abused and gave threat to her.
3. Based on the complaint the jurisdictional Police registered the case in Crime No.50/2020 for the offences punishable under Section 376, 417, 504 and 506 r/w. Section 34 of IPC. During investigation petitioner No.1 was arrested. Later on he secured bail. Charge sheet is filed in S.C. No.76/2021.
4. In the meanwhile Criminal Petition No.101543/2021 filed accused Nos. 2 and 3 came to be allowed on 07.02.2022 and proceedings against them is quashed.
5. The elders of the family and friends of both the parties have settled the matter amicably. Respondent No.2/ complainant is now married and settled in her life. Similarly petitioner No.1/ accused No.1 is also married and settled. Both of them have decided to close the issue once -4- CRL.P No. 102449 of 2022 and for all. Since the offences are non compundable in nature, respondent No.2/ complainant has filed application under Section 320(2) r/w. 482 of Cr.P.C, seeking leave of this Hon'ble Court to compound the offences.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that having regard to the fact that the parties have settled their dispute amicably, continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of the law. Already proceedings against accused Nos.2 and 3 is quashed. In similar circumstances the Hon'ble Apex Court has permitted the parties to compromise and quash the proceedings and prays to allow the compromise petition and quash the proceedings.
7. Today respondent No.2/ complainant appeared before the Court through Sri. K.B. Gudihal learned counsel. He has filed vakalath for her. Application under Section 320(2) of r/w. 482 of Cr.P.C supported by affidavit filed by respondent No.2 as well as petitioner No.1. Both petitioner No. 1 and respondent No.2 are Government -5- CRL.P No. 102449 of 2022 employees. As on the date of the complaint, respondent No.2 was aged 30 years and a major. It appears it was a love affair which has gone soar and consequently respondent No.2 chose to file complaint. Now, respondent No.2/ complainant is married and settled in her life. Similarly petitioner No.1 / accused No.1 is also married and settled. Both of them are Government employees. In fact on being enquired by the Court, the parties more particularly respondent No.2/ complainant admit that she has compromised with the petitioners and seeks to quash the proceedings.
8. As noted earlier a charge sheet came to be filed against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 417, 504 and 506 r/w. Section 34 of IPC. Of which the offences punishable under Section 376 is non compoundable.
9. In this regard, the parties have relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narindra -6- CRL.P No. 102449 of 2022 Singh V/s. State of Punjab1 (Narindra Singh's case) wherein at paragraph 31, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid down principles by which the High Court would be guided in giving adequate treatment to the settlement between the parties and exercising its power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C while accepting the settlement and quashing the proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement with direction to continue with the criminal proceedings.
10. In Gian Singh V/s. State of Punjab and another2, (Gian Singh's Case) the Hon'ble Supreme Court has discussed the scope of the power of trial Court in excising the discretion under Section 320 of Cr.P.C and that of the High court excising inherited powers under section 482 of Cr.P.C. In Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand and another3, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that the High Court can quash criminal proceedings under 1 2014 AIR SCW 2065 2 (2012) 10 SCC 303 3 (2014) 9 SCC 653 -7- CRL.P No. 102449 of 2022 Section 482 of Cr.P.C., even though the offence alleged is non-compoundable, if parties have amicably settled their disputes and victim has no objection. However, this would depend on the facts of each case. Offences which involve moral turpitude, grave offences like rape, murder cannot be effaced by quashing proceedings because they have harmful effect on Society and are not restricted to individuals or groups. Quashing of such offence may send a wrong signal to the Society. However, if the High Court is convinced that the offences are individual or personal in nature and not affecting the public peace or tranquility and quashing of proceedings on account of compromise would secure ends of justice, it may quash the same. In such case, the prosecution becomes lame and pursuing such lame prosecution may become waste of time and energy and also unsettle compromise and obstruct restoration of peace.
11. On similar facts in Criminal Petition No.8754/2021 and Criminal Petition No.4172/2022, the -8- CRL.P No. 102449 of 2022 Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has permitted the parties to compromise non-compoundable offences including the offences punishable under Section 376 of IPC.
12. In the light of the above decisions, it would be necessary to examine whether this is a fit case to accept the compromise between the parties. Perusal of the material placed on record it becomes evident that after the love affair between petitioner No.1/ accused No.1 and respondent No.2/ complainant became soar, respondent No.2 has chosen to file complaint alleging that petitioner No.1/ accused No.1 sexually assaulted her with a promise to marry and has also roped in the other accused. Since petitioner No.1/ accused No.1 and respondent No.2 / complainant are already married and settled in their respective lives and as they have also entered into compromise no purpose would serve by continuing the proceedings. Continuation of dispute between the parties even after they have compromised would become lame and pursuing such a lame prosecution may become waste -9- CRL.P No. 102449 of 2022 of time and energy and also unsettle the compromise and obstruct the restoration of peace. Having regard to these aspects, this Court is of the considered opinion that continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of process of the Court. In order to do real, complete and substantial justice between the parties, it would be appropriate to quash the criminal proceedings by exercising the powers under section 482 of Cr.P.C. and accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The compromise petition filed under Section 320(2) R/w. 482 of Cr.P.C., is allowed.
The permission is granted to the parties to compound and in the result, the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioners for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 417, 504 and 506 r/w. Section 34 of IPC, in Crime No.50/2020 (S.C. No.76/2021 on the file of IV Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad), is hereby quashed.
- 10 -
CRL.P No. 102449 of 2022 In view of disposal of the matter, pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and are disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE PJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35