A.K. MURALIDHAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pursuant to the order dated 8-2-2013, today the learned Counsel for the petitioners filed a memo along with a Banker's cheque issued by Dhanalaxmi Bank Limited, in favour of respondent 2-Smt. G.S. Asha for a sum of Rs. 25,50,000/-. Respondent 2 is present-in-person before the Court and in terms of the affidavit filed by her on the previous date of hearing, she submitted that she has no objection for quashing the prosecution launched against the petitioner in C.C. No. 22134 of 2008 pending before the V Additional C.M.M., Bangalore. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners as well as respondent 2, who is present before the Court in person. Perused the affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent on the previous date of hearing as also the copy of the memorandum of agreement entered into between the 1st petitioner and the 2nd respondent before the mediator on 16-6-2012. As per the terms of settlement, respondent 2 has undertaken to withdraw all the criminal prosecutions launched on the basis of the complaints lodged by her.

(2.) Perusal of the allegations in the charge-sheet and other materials prima facie indicates that the accusation made against these petitioners is essentially based on matrimonial dispute. The matrimonial dispute between the 1st petitioner and the 2nd respondent has been now amicably settled between the parties. The 1st petitioner agreed to pay and the 2nd respondent agreed to receive a sum of Rs. 51,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty-one Lakhs) towards the maintenance and alimony, out of which the 2nd respondent has already received a sum of Rs. 25,50,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Lakhs and Fifty thousand only) and towards the balance amount the 1st petitioner has today tendered the Banker's Cheque as noticed supra. As per the terms of the settlement between the parties, the balance amount of Rs. 25,50,000/- shall be paid to the 2nd respondent at the time of passing the final order on the consent petition filed by them under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in M.C. No. 2551 of 2012 pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore.

(3.) Having regard to the fact that the matrimonial dispute between the 1st petitioner and respondent 2 has been amicably settled, no useful purpose would be served by continuing the prosecution launched against these petitioners in C.C. No. 22134 of 2008 for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The continuance of the prosecution is sheer waste of precious public time of the Court and also it would cause unnecessary hardship to the petitioners who have been arraigned as accused.