VINAY GOPAL Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER Nos.2 and 3 are present who are the father and mother of petitioner No.1. Respondent No.2 - Smt. Nandini N. is also present before the Court. Perused the records.

(2.) THE petitioners' Counsel submits that the parties have compromised the matter before the II Metropolitan Magistrate Traffic Court at Bangalore in Crl. Mis. No.58/2010 resolving all the disputes. A Joint Memo for settlement has also filed before the said Court. The certified copy of the said Joint Memo is also produced before this Court.

(3.) IT is categorically stated that due to irreconcilable differences and incompatibility of the temperaments, the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 have been living separately since 01.01.2007. Though their marriage was solemnized on 20.10.2006 and in spite of best effort of the elders and well wishers, the differences between the parties did not yield any solution. Hence, both the parties have decided to get themselves withdraw from the conjugal relationship. Therefore, they have entered into compromise. In the meantime, when the dispute arose between the parties, it appears the 2nd respondent has also filed a complaint in FIR Crime No. 88/2009 which culminated in C.C. No. 10152/2012 pending on the file of the learned 2nd Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore for the offences punishable under Section 498 -A of I.P.C. and Sections 3, 4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act. As the entire disputes have been resolved between the parties in the Joint Memo filed before the 2nd Metropolitan Magistrate Traffic Court, Bangalore in Crl. Mis. No.58/2010 the respondent herein has admitted and accepted to withdraw all the allegations made against each other and also to withdraw C.C. No.10152/2012 as she has no grievance against the 1st petitioner herein.