Karnataka High Court
Smt Vanishri Alias Swathi W/O. ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 26 September, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:11339
CRL.P No. 102275 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102275 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. VANISHRI @ SWATHI
W/O MALLIKARJUN SHIRASANGI,
AGE: 30 YEARS,
OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE,
R/O. 835, NUTAN NAGAR JEDDI,
YELLAPUR-581359,
DIST: UTTARA KANNADA.
2. SMT. VEENA
W/O GOPAL SHETTY,
AGE: 54 YEARS,
OCC: PRIVATE WORK,
R/O. 835, NUTAN NAGAR JEDDI,
YELLAPUR-581359,
ANNAPURNA DIST: UTTARA KANNADA.
CHINNAPPA
DANDAGAL
3. NITISH
Digitally signed
by ANNAPURNA S/O GOPAL SHETTY,
CHINNAPPA AGE: 29 YEARS,
DANDAGAL
OCC: PRIVATE WORK,
R/O. 835, NUTAN NAGAR JEDDI,
YELLAPUR-581359,
DIST: UTTARA KANNADA.
4. RAJESH
S/O GANESH SHETTY,
AGE: 53 YEARS,
OCC: COOLIE,
R/O. 835, NUTAN NAGAR JEDDI,
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:11339
CRL.P No. 102275 of 2023
YELLAPUR-581359,
DIST: UTTARA KANNADA.
5. SMT. GEETA
W/O RAJESH SHETTY
AGE: 49 YEARS,
OCC: PRIVATE WORK,
R/O. 835, NUTAN NAGAR JEDDI,
YELLAPUR-581359,
DIST: UTTARA KANNADA.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. JAYAVANT KAMBALI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH APMC POLICE STATION,
NAVANAGAR,
R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD-580001.
2. SHRI. MALLIKARJUN
S/O. BASAVARAJ SHIRASANGI,
AGE: 33 YEARS,
OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE,
R/O. 44, RADHIKA PARK,
GAMANAGATTI ROAD,
BHAIRIDEVARAKOPPA,
HUBBALLI-580025,
DIST: DHARWAD.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1,
SRI. VISHWANATH S BICHAGATTI AND
SRI. PARASHURAM C. SAJJANAR ADVS FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S. 482 OF CR.P.C,
PRAYING THIS COURT TO, QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS
PENDING ON THE FILES OF HON'BLE III ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND JMFC COURT HUBBALLI IN C.C.NO. 3037/2021 FOR
THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SEC. 120B, 406, 409, 420, 465,
468, 471, R/W SEC. 34 OF IPC AND 74 OF IT ACT 2000 IN
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:11339
CRL.P No. 102275 of 2023
CRIME NO. 59/2020 REGISTERED BY APMC PS BY ALLOWING
THE PETITION IN SO FAR AS PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 TO
6 ARE CONCERNED.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
In this petition filed under section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (for short, "Cr.P.C."). The petitioner who are arraigned accused Nos.1 to 5 have sought for quashing proceedings initiated against them in C.C. No.3037/2021 on the file of III Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Hubballi, for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 406, 409, 420, 465, 468, 471, r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short, "IPC") and Section 74 of Information Technology Act, 2000 (for short, "I.T.Act").
2. Respondent No.2/complainant has appeared through counsel.
3. The parties have entered into a compromise and filed joint memo as under:
"Herein, the Petitioners and the Respondent No.2 submit this Joint Memo as under:
That, the Respondent No.2 files a complaint against the Petitioners alleging that, he was married to the first Petitioner on 22.06.2018 who is D/o Gopal Shetty of -4- NC: 2023:KHC-D:11339 CRL.P No. 102275 of 2023 Yellapur in presence of relatives, friends and elders at Hubballi and the said Swati @ Vanishree along with her parents and further alleged that the family members of his wife changed the parents name of the child Bhoomika who begotten by first marriage by creating false documents with forged signature which have been collected by the Respondent No. 2 through Right to information Act. In fact, the said Swati @ Vanishree has changed the name of daughter's biological parents as her Uncle and Aunty in Anganawadi in 2015 but she got the fake birth certificate in 2017, also the Respondent No. 2 came in contact with the said Swati @ Vanishree during 2017 much later then the change took place, It is also very important to state that the Respondent No.2 was not at all in India during the period of these changes.
2. It is also humbly submitted that all Petitioners suppressed the existing martial relationship & birth of child to the Petitioner No. 2 and dishonestly trapped the Respondent No. 2 through matrimonial website and fraudulently entered into another marital relationship with an oblique motive of pre-planned extortion. Further Petitioners continuously blackmailed the Respondent No.2 & his family members to fulfill their unlawful demands, these all criminal acts and deeds of the Petitioners made the Respondent No. 2 & his family members to suffer mentally, physically and socially lot and put them into deep agony and caused injustice. In that regard Respondent No.2 had registered the case against Petitioners with A.P.M.C. Police Navanagar, Hubballi In Crime No. 59/2020 for the offences punishable U/s 149.
406, 465, 420 IPC. The 2nd Respondent further alleged that his wife Vanishree by suppressing the 1 delivery from the 2nd Respondent and hospital and got the certificate stating that the 2nd delivery is the first delivery and to Cover up her mischief, the wife Vanishree signed in -5- NC: 2023:KHC-D:11339 CRL.P No. 102275 of 2023 hospital records and availed the benefit of Central Government Matruvandana by making application to the Child Development Officer, Yellapur and Vanishree thereby committed an offences as alleged and the Respondent registered the crime against the Petitioners. The Hon'ble Trial Court took cognizance for the Offences Punishable under Sections U/s 120B, 409, 420, 465, 468, 471 R/w 34 of IPC R/w Section 74 of 1.T. Act, 2000 and issued summons against the Petitioners. That the Petitioners had earlier filed Criminal Petition before this Hon'ble Court bearing Criminal Petition No.100740/2022 which was disposed on merits on 13.04.2023.
3. It is submitted that, the Petitioners herein and the Respondent No. 2 having entered into a compromise between them in the given facts and circumstances of this case and knowing fully such facts and circumstances and the background of the re-union, they are jointly filing this joint memo to put a full stop to the proceedings and the Respondent No. 2 has no objection of any kind to quash the proceedings pending on the files of Hon'ble III Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC Court Hubballi in C.C.No.3037/2021 for the Offences Punishable under Sections 120B, 406, 409, 420, 465, 468, 471, R/w Sec 34 of IPC and 74 of Information Technology Act 2000, against the Petitioners herein who are Accused No. 1 to 5.
4. That, during the pendency of this Petition, the couple before the Court that is the Respondent No.2 and the Petitioner No.1 have sorted out the differences between them and have resolved to lead a happy married life in the best interest of their little child as well of them. And accordingly, the couples have undertaken to withdraw all the cases filed against each other in the best interest of their future. Their settlement is voluntary and without any coercion and hence the same may kindly be appreciated -6- NC: 2023:KHC-D:11339 CRL.P No. 102275 of 2023 by this Hon'ble Court. The settlement is based on the following agreed terms and conditions.
a) That, the Petitioner No.1 has agreed to withdraw all the cases filed by her and also Respondent No.2 will follow the same in the best interest of their child Tanush.
b) It is further agreed between the parties that, the Petitioner No.1 shall reside with her husband/ Respondent No.2 unconditionally to support her husband/Father of the minor child Tanush on whatever decision he takes for the welfare of the child Tanush and his education and in all manners unconditionally.
c) This settlement is on their free will and wish and they have no coercion from anyone or from each other to do same.
d) The above Petition is filed by the Parties herein on their own accord and there is no collusion between the Parties herein.
WHEREFORE, the Petitioners and Respondent No.2 most humbly prayed that, the Hon'ble Court may be pleased:
a) To allow the Joint memo and Quash the entire Criminal proceedings pending on the files of Hon'ble III Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC Court Hubballi in C.C.No.3037/2021 for the Offences Punishable under Sections 120B, 406, 409, 420, 465, 468, 471, R/w See 34 of IPC and 74 of Information Technology Act 2000 against the Petitioners/ Accused No.1 to 5."
4. Both the petitioner/accused Nos.1 to 5 and respondent No.2/complainant are present before the Court and -7- NC: 2023:KHC-D:11339 CRL.P No. 102275 of 2023 they admit the compromise and respondent No.2/complainant prays to allow the petition and quash the criminal proceedings.
5. At this stage, it is relevant to refer to the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narindra 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 a direction to continue with the criminal proceedings.
5.1. 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 exercising inherited powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. 1 2014 AIR SCW 2065 2 (2012) 10 SCC 303 -8- NC: 2023:KHC-D:11339 CRL.P No. 102275 of 2023 5.2. In Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand and another3, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that the High Court can quash criminal proceedings under 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. The Hon'ble Supreme Court also held that 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 the 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 unsettled compromise and obstruct restoration of peace.
3 (2014) 9 SCC 653 -9- NC: 2023:KHC-D:11339 CRL.P No. 102275 of 2023
6. 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. From the complaint averment, it is evident that the dispute between the parties is due to matrimonial discard involving a child from the previous marriage of petitioner No.1/accused No.1. The dispute between the parties is going to affect the future of the said child. Having regard to the fact that now petitioner No.1/accused No.1 and respondent No.2/complainant have decided to live together and they have begotten child through their marriage, it would be appropriate and expedient to accept the compromise between the parties. Continuation of the criminal proceedings would not be in the interest of both parties and children born to them and as such it is fit case to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 5 by exercising the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C and accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed in terms of the compromise petition.
- 10 -
NC: 2023:KHC-D:11339
CRL.P No. 102275 of 2023
Permission is granted to the parties to
compound and in the result, the entire
proceedings CC.No.3037/2021 on the file of the III Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hubballi, for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 4 06, 409, 420, 465, 468, 471, r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 74 of Information Technology Act, 2000, as against petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 5 are hereby quashed.
In view of disposal of the matter, pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and are disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE AC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4