R. HARISH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Govt. Pleader.

(2.) The parties were present yesterday i.e. on 21.10.2019 and during the hearing, a joint memo was filed into court and the same reads as under:-

(3.) On a query the parties submitted that they have amicably resolved the issue. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused is none other than the brother-in-law. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner and the complainant are brother-in-law and sister-in-law. That the dispute pertains to a partition of the family property namely the house property. It was alleged that the petitioner had induced the complainant to vacate the residence on the promise of paying its value and that payment was not made and hence on these allegations the complaint came to be lodged by the second respondent-complainant. It is now stated that the parties being the members of the same family, have in their own wisdom agreed to resolve it amicably. He would submit that the civil case in O.S. No.5583/2007 has been ordered in terms of the settlement entered into between the parties.