ANSUMAN PADHY Vs. PRAGYAN PADHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the petitioner's counsel and learned HCGP for 2nd respondent-State. 1st respondent despite service has remained absent.

(2.) PETITIONER's counsel submit that the 1st respondent-wife has lodged a complaint only to harass the petitioner and it is clear from her statement that her husband gave her any ill treatment in connection with demand of dowry or any kind of harassment of whatever nature and only to teach him a lesson, she has given the complaint. Apart from this, it is submitted that the 1st respondent has subsequently married and is living with her new found husband happily and the marriage between the petitioner and the 1st respondent also got dissolved by virtue of the order passed in M.C.No.3632/2010. Under these circumstances, no purpose would be served in keeping the matter alive.

(3.) IN the result, petition is allowed and proceedings in C.C.No.17884/2011 pending on the file of the II Addl.CMM, Bangalore, stand quashed.