Surendra vs State of Karnataka

Type Court Judgment Court Karnataka Decided Mar 28, 2025

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1687557

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1687557
Court: Karnataka High Court
Judge: Hemant Chandangoudar
Decided On: Mar 28, 2025
Case Number: WP/9347/2025

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Surendra

Respondent

State of Karnataka

Excerpt

.....anusha hiremath, learned counsel files power for respondent no.2. the same is placed on record.3. petitioners are charge sheeted for the offences punishable under sections 85, 352, 3(5) of bns act, (comparative to old section 498a , 504, r/w 34 of ipc.) -3-4. the prosecution alleges that, accused no.1 is thehusband, accused no.2 is the mother-in-law, accused no.3 is the sister-in-law of the defacto-complainant and they subjected her to cruelty, both mentally and physically.5. the parties are present before this court, and theyhave filed an application for compounding, stating that they have amicably resolved the dispute among themselves, and in terms of the settlement, the 2nd respondent has reunited with her husband-petitioner no.1 and is leading a cordial marital life, and the respondent no.2 further agreed to withdraw all the allegations made against the petitioners and has no objections for quashing the impugned proceedings.6. the application is placed on record.7. though the offences alleged against the petitionersaccused are cognizable and non-compoundable, however, having regard to the fact that, the parties have amicably resolved the dispute among themselves, and further therespondent no.2 having no objection for quashing the impugned proceedings, it would be a futile exercise, if the petitioners-accused is subjected to trial, since the probability of their conviction is remote and bleak in view of the settlement. therefore, the continuation of the proceedings will be an abuse of the process of law.8. accordingly, i pass the following: -4-orderi. the petition is allowed; ii. the impugned proceedings in c.c.no.35264/2024 pending on the file of the learned 37th addl. chief judicial magistrate court, bangalore, insofar it relates to the petitioners-accused herein stands quashed. sd/- (hemant chandangoudar) judge hr

Full Judgment

-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 9347 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
1. SURENDRA SON OF RAMU AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
2. MANJULA WIFE OF RAMU AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
3. RAMYA DAUGHTER OF RAMU AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS ALL THE PETITIONERS ARE RESIDING AT NO.126, SRINIDHI NILAYA, 4TH A CROSS, NEAR HULIYURAMMA, TEMPLE, MOOKAMBIKA NAGARA, BANASHANKARI 3RD STAGE, Digitally signed by HOSAKEREHALLI, R HEMALATHA Location: High BANGALORE - 560085. Court of …PETITIONERS Karnataka (BY SRI. ALLAH BAKASH M., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA STATE BY GIRINAGAR POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. SMT. RADHIKA WIFE OF SURENDRA -2- AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS R/AT NO.10, 6TH CROSS, GAYATHRI LAYOUT, RAMASANDRA SULIKERE POST, KENGERI BANGALORE - 560 060. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. LAKSHMAN B., HCGP FOR R1; SMT. ANUSHA HIREMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH CHARGE SHEET DATED 30/08/2024 IN C.C.NO.35264/2024 AGAINST THE PETITIONERS FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S. 85, 352, 3(5) OF BNS ACT, (COMPARATIVE TO OLD U/S. 498a, 504, 34 OF THE I.P.C), PENDING ON THE FIE OF 37TH ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, BANGALORE, VIZ-ANNEXURE-A, SO FAR AS PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

ORAL ORDER

Learned HCGP accepts notice for respondent No.1.

2. Smt. Anusha Hiremath, learned counsel files power for respondent No.2. The same is placed on record.

3. Petitioners are charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 352, 3(5) of BNS Act, (comparative to old section 498A , 504, r/w 34 of IPC.) -3-

4. The prosecution alleges that, accused No.1 is the

husband, accused No.2 is the mother-in-law, accused No.3 is the sister-in-law of the defacto-complainant and they subjected her to cruelty, both mentally and physically.

5. The parties are present before this Court, and they

have filed an application for compounding, stating that they have amicably resolved the dispute among themselves, and in terms of the settlement, the 2nd respondent has reunited with her husband-petitioner No.1 and is leading a cordial marital life, and the respondent No.2 further agreed to withdraw all the allegations made against the petitioners and has no objections for quashing the impugned proceedings.

6. The application is placed on record.

7. Though the offences alleged against the petitionersaccused are cognizable and non-compoundable, however, having regard to the fact that, the parties have amicably resolved the dispute among themselves, and further the

respondent No.2 having no objection for quashing the impugned proceedings, it would be a futile exercise, if the petitioners-accused is subjected to trial, since the probability of their conviction is remote and bleak in view of the settlement. Therefore, the continuation of the proceedings will be an abuse of the process of law.

8. Accordingly, I pass the following: -4-

ORDER

i. The Petition is allowed; ii. The impugned proceedings in C.C.No.35264/2024 pending on the file of the learned 37th Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Bangalore, insofar it relates to the petitioners-accused herein stands quashed. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE HR

Same Court & Year Karnataka · 2025 Same Parties Surendra vs State of Karnataka Same Judge Hemant Chandangoudar