High Court Karnataka High Court

Kanwaljit Singh Bedi vs The State Of Karnataka By Jc Nagar … on 24 June, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Kanwaljit Singh Bedi vs The State Of Karnataka By Jc Nagar … on 24 June, 2008
Author: Huluvadi G.Ramesh
'4 " V  the following:

:24 THE may COURT 0;? KARNA'I'AI<A AT BANGA:,_{)kE 5   " A.

Dated this the 24*" day ofJune, 2008 

Before

ms HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HU1§UVVgi.:191  G: '~ « .  A

Ctimimfl! Petitio}§._v:v'I3fi9 x"::3¢3_5V  T'   

Between:

Kanwaljit Singh Bedi
S-1'0 late Jagit Singh Bedi

C'.-5702, Sukh Saga: Apartments     A

52 1}' Extension, Patpmfganj
Delhi 110 (392 ' x

(By M T  A;;_§};;  V. 

And:

1 stat; afkax-snatajka   .. . u 
J C Nagia; Pn1ice§'Staiiota--, Emgalme

_ 2  Arvinti  V'

..Wfo; Kanwaljit Sin *3:-{Edi
« _ Dice :F.aid4?_v"SiIxg!1 Chandhoke
 " #. S=i,._6"' C;ro§s,---- Annayappa Block
 Ioiséig. Bangalore

(By Si-'§_H C s~i:1¢ga;;gaiah, Adv. for R1;

 'Mia Prami.lai"Associates, Adv. for R2)

Rgspondants

AA ;  Criminal Petition is filed uncier 3.482 of the CLPC praying to

 T proceedings in CC 86{}!20G2 before the CMM, Bangalore.

This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court



ORDER

Petitiener has sought for quashing of the proceedings before the
CMM, Bangalore for the offence under S.498A, 324, 506 B IPC 4

of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

Compiainant as well as the petitionvetwhsve «

diverse by consent before the District Judge,

complainant has also settied the claims ‘mtiiesbly..v. no ‘V

eempatibility between me parties,” the been titiss-nlvecvji. Even in

the afidavit te the decree of divorce, fitey

were Iiving sepersteiy fer years.

” _ of B t§”.ios.«–‘.::E ‘& Ore Vs State afflarymm & Or: –~ AIR

zeta; SC 1334 Apegcsm has heidz

Aitwis ef Court to enceurage genuine settlements of

V disputes. S.498A is enacted to prevent torture to

. n at by her husbanci or by relatives of her husband.
‘ was initiated by wife under S.=t98A against her
husband and his relatives. Subsequently, she settles} her
disputes with husband and his relations. Wife and husband
agreed for mutual divorce. Application filed by wife for
quashing the preeeedkxgs initiated by her against husband

wk

and his relatives was refused by the Punjab & Haryana” V,
Court which was reversed as net proper as it wauieii ._ *1 ..
women from settling eariier anti that is not 3
Chapter XXA ofPena1 Code. ‘ ‘ V A’

In Vi€W of the same, petition i§.§1Iowcv§t3;.A Lflle knpilgiasfifl L’

pending befure the CMM in CC 86G!2OG2,.:is~ quashed- _ 1 T

% Judd?