High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt Sapna vs State Of Karnataka on 25 November, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Smt Sapna vs State Of Karnataka on 25 November, 2010
Author: C.R.Kumaraswamy
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 25"' DAY OF NOVEMBER 2010

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. EUSTICE c.R. KUMARASWAM'{""T  A 

BETWEEN:

SMT SAPNA
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS

W/O BABU

R/A NO.241, 15* BLOCK

RAJENDRA NAGAR

KORAMANGALA V A   *  '  '
BANGALORE -- 560 047.   p  Y. .".~--..EET1'Tt_ONER

(BY SR1: BASAVARAJA PATELO v'K,Y.AD\jO§:AT'E.vEORjv .. 
M/S: GRATIA LAW_cHAMBER.=;,RADVOCATES), =

1. STATE OEVKARNATA;<A  4  .
BY BASAVTANAGODI v.:O--.Y;EN._PO:,:cE STATION
REP BY ITS-PUBLIC PROS_E£uTOR,_ 
BANGALORE.'-, -   . 

2. SR: BABU _  
 , AGEDABOUT 35 YEARS__
 'S/O SMT SARAEA
 R/A'N,O.241,.;5T BLOCK
*RA3'ENDRA*NAGAR, *
KO.RAMANc;AEA 
BANGALORE 

 -SMT SARAL-A 

  'AGED ABQUT1? 50 YEARS

H A  A  W/ODATE RAJU

   E.RANT-D/O SARALA

'~~AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
A fix'/I

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5506 OF 20_1~G»..').:":~.,  TORI



5. JASSI D/O SARALA
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS

6. ROOPA D/O SARALA
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS

7. REENA D/O SARALA
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS

RESPONDENTS 3 TO 7 ARE

R/AT No.22, 20″‘ BLOCK –

B w s BLOCK, KORAMANGALA A

BANGALORE — 47. “~…RE’SP€jND’5N”i’§.

(BY SRI: B RAIA SUBRAHMANYA BHAPT’,..HIGHVt:DUP”€ .
GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR RESP.ONDENT !\iO__.1)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED DNDERSECTION 4’82,_OF_CODE
OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO’ OLTVASH THE ENTIRE
PROCEEDINGS IN CRIME NO.232I2.C09′._RE-::5IsTERED’=Bv THE FIRST
RESPONDENT POLICE AGAINST RESP._o’i\1DENt;’NoS;2*..TO» 7 FOR THE
OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION -ABBA OF”IND1’AN—- PENAL CODE,
PENDING BEFOREIIACMiYF,’BANGA:LORE-” A ‘ ‘

THIS CRIMINAL… i~.ErI%TfI”Oiv ~COMING ON FOR ADMISSION BEFORE
THE COURT THIS DAV’, TH.E.CCaL;RT MAjDLE”THi§, F0.i.LOWING:-

The petitioner Counsel are present.
Re.Spondent’:’No~.2 isV”a!_s:ov present before the Court. Joint

afiid_a\Iit=of De-tAitioan’er__ and respondent No.2 is filed, which

reads as Dnde’r;’

“‘\a’\.Jv’g_:-é’3~, Smt.Sapna W/o.Babu, aged about 30,

No.241, 13’ Block, Rajendranagar,

~ Kofanaangala, Bangalore»-47, and Sri Babs;

-S;-‘}o.SaraEa, aged about 35, R/a No.24; 1″ Biock,
A/’

Rajendranagar, Koramangaia, Bangaiore–47, do
hereby solemniy affirm and state on oath as

follows.

1. We state that we are the 15′ petitioner and C’

the 2″” respondent respectfuliy in the *’

petition. We are conversant with the facts…a:nd”‘«C.V”

circumstances of the above petition. ‘”Henrce-;’we’ « ‘

are deposing here under.

2. We state that we are”CVlega!|yawedded”,:a’ri~rj’~—

the marriage between us wa3.._’%so_|emn’i-zeid'”on;

6.1.1999 at E.W.S2iq..1__i’artedr’s’,” ppi<;sra4mangaia;

Bangalore. _ . . V _

3. We state that ou:r”rnafriageiwtas; performed

in accordance i}j{wi.ii1’dLiv”Reitg’i”ous’ rivtes’ and we had

two chii_Jdren_’ tojV:us__oIJ_t _otwour wed iock,

4. IVSapnaV statVe:jt%hatV_:CI*-have filed a complaint
against the__ hrespo_ndeht:_”..’i’No.2 and his famiiy
menfii-§’)e’rs. befo’te._V_VVtVhe Adugodi Poiice Station in

‘VCiTiV{t”‘i”{°.V. N”o.2′.’}.2,_/2O()VEV9u””‘i’or the offence punishabie

of the Indian Penal Code in

crim~e’No;2’32’rof’2oo9 which is pending before the

Court of 32″” Additional Chief Metropoiitan

K”f”Magistrate, Bangaiore.

Q/,

In the circumstances, we have decided to
put an end to all the cases on the following
conditions:

5. I Sapha herein further state that I have no

objection in this Court quashing Crime No.232 A
2009 which is pending before the 2″” Additional,~,:’*-ll”

Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore.

6. I state that since the complaint were uiodged 4′ ‘

due to temperamental differ_ehce*..a’n-d irnpl’.ied” C’

imputations we have no objecti’o_n to.” duasgh

entire proceedings. _ _ _ _ _V

Therefore, we S.rnji=.Sa’pna.,l”VJ[o..,’Babu and
Sri.Babu S/o.Sarala respecttuily’
Court may be v’p’etition as

prayed for i_n…the of _j..ust;ice..” ,

2. Thevzdispute husband and wife and

they have settled”-.th’e.rriatt-er’.’*~*”llV In order to encourage the
setti’e.merii:j’aarriyed at between the husband and wife and also
as of the joint affidavit that the wife has

objection the Crime, in my view, this petition

-..l.de$e’ryes to beiallowed.

v~:l_3rVI;n’~the result, I pass the following:

€/’

QRDER

This Criminal Petition is allowed in terms of the jointijfe

affidavit filed by the petitioner and respondent

Consequently, Crime No.232/2009 of Basavanagudi…\itio»m’en::

Police Station pending on the file of H Acldl.

is hereby quashed.

f.1S§GE_f

KM