Karnataka High Court
Manu C @ Madenuru Manu vs The State Of Karnataka on 7 August, 2025
Author: S.R.Krishna Kumar
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:30816
CRL.P No. 11325 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.11325 OF 2025
[482(Cr.PC)/ 528(BNSS)]
BETWEEN:
MANU C @ MADENURU MANU
S/O. LATE CHANDREGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
SHANTHIGRAMA HOBLI,
MADENUR, HASSAN-573 225,
NAGARABHAVI, BENGALURU,
KARNATAKA.
(ADDRESS MENTIONED IN FIR)
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. CHANDAN B.K., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. BHADRAVADI SIDDESWARA, ADVOCATES)
AND:
Digitally signed 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
by VINAYAKA B
V BY ANNAPOORNESHWARI NAGAR P.S.,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENCH
Date: 2025.08.13 BANGALORE-560 001.
14:43:58 +0530
2. SMT. VATHASALA. M.S.
DAUGHTER OF LATE SURESH,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
NO.1246, VISHNU NILAYA,
9TH BLOCK, NAGARABAVI 2ND STAGE,
BENGALURU-560 072.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. BASAVARAJ R.Y., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:30816
CRL.P No. 11325 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C (UNDER
SECTION 528 BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER
PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CC.NO.
26047/2025, FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS
64(2)(M),69,89,318(4),351(2),352 OF BNS, 2023, PENDING BEFORE
THE VI ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE
AGAINST THE PETITIONER AND ETC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
In this criminal petition, the petitioner seeks following
reliefs.
a) To quash the entire proceedings in
CC.No.26047/2025, for the offence punishable
under Sections 64(2)(m), 69, 89, 318(4),
351(2), 352 of BNS, 2023, which is pending
before the VI Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Bangalore, against the petitioner;
b) And pass such other relief/s as this Honb’le
court deems fit in the circumstances of the
case, in the interest of justice.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 – State
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:30816
CRL.P No. 11325 of 2025
HC-KAR
and learned counsel for respondent No.2 and perused the
material on record.
3. The petitioner and respondent No.2 have filed a
joint compromise petition seeking permission to compound
the offences. The said compromise petition and affidavit filed
by respondent No.2 read as under:
“APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 528 R/W 359 OF
THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023The Petitioner and the Victim in the above case
most humbly file the following joint compromise memo for
compounding the offences.
1. The Petitioner is facing the trail in Crime
No.181/2025 in CC No. 26047/2025 which is pending
before the VI Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Bangalore for the offences punishable under sections
64(2)(m), 69, 89, 318(4), 351(2), 352 of BNS, 2023, the
Petitioner have approached this Hon’ble Court. The matter
is posted for summons.
2. The Respondent respectfully submits that
she no longer wishes to pursue the present criminal
proceedings and does not intend to support the case of
the prosecution. The parties have amicably settled their
differences and, in view of the mutual understanding
arrived at between them, have consented to compound
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:30816
CRL.P No. 11325 of 2025HC-KAR
the offence in accordance with law. It is, therefore,
humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to
take on record the said settlement and, in the interest of
justice, be pleased to quash the proceedings arising out of
the said complaint.
3. The petitioner humbly submits that, this
Hon’ble court pleased to be read the averments made in
the main petition as part & parcel of this application to
avoid repetition.
WHEREFORE, the petitioner and Victim most
humbly pray this Hon’ble court be pleased to accept their
joint compromise affidavit and permit them compound the
offences made against him in Crime No.181/2025 in CC
No. 26047/2025 which is pending before the VI Additional
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bangalore for the offences
punishable under sections 64(2)(m), 69, 89, 318(4),
351(2), 352. of BNS, 2023, the Petitioner have
approached this Hon’ble Court in the ends of justice.
AFFIDAVIT
I, Vathsala Madapura Suresh, D/o. Suresh, Aged
about 36 years, R/at. No.10/8, 7th Cross, Lakshmi
Layout, Munnekolala, Marathahalli Colony, Bengaluru-
560037, today at Dharwad, do hereby state on oath as
follows:-
1. I am the defacto complainant in
CC.No.26047/2025 in Crime No.181/2025, which is
presently pending on the file of the Court of the Hon’ble
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC:30816
CRL.P No. 11325 of 2025HC-KAR
VI Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru. I am
fully acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the
case, hence swearing this affidavit.
2. The accused have filed a criminal petition under
section 482 of Cr.P.C r/w., 528 of BNSS for quashing the
entire investigation CC.26047/2025 in Crime pending
before the above court in Cr. No.181/2025, before this
Hon’ble Court. I respectfully state that I no longer wish to
pursue the present criminal proceedings and do not
intend to support the case of the prosecution. The parties
have amicably resolved their differences and, in view of
the mutual understanding arrived at between us, have
consented to compound the offence in accordance with
law. Accordingly, it is humbly prayed that this Hon’ble
Court may be pleased to take on record the said
settlement and, in the interest of justice, be pleased to
quash the criminal proceedings arising out of the said
complaint. Since all issues between the parties have been
amicably resolved, I have no further interest in continuing
with the present proceedings. It is, therefore, respectfully
submitted that the matter may kindly be quashed.
VERIFICATION
I, Vathsala Madapura Suresh, D/o. Suresh, do
hereby state that the averments made above in I.A.No.1
at Para 1 to 2 are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge, belief and information.”
-6-
NC: 2025:KHC:30816
CRL.P No. 11325 of 2025
HC-KAR
4. Under identical circumstances, in the case of
Madhukar and others Vs. The state of Maharashtra and
another and Prabhakar Vs. The State of Maharashtra
and another1, the Apex Court recorded the settlement
between the parties and quashed the impugned proceedings
by holding as under:
“1. Leave granted.
2. The present appeals arise from a common order
dated 07.03.2025 passed by the High Court of Judicature
at Bombay, Aurangabad Bench in Criminal Application
Nos.2561 and 2185 of 2024, whereby the High Court
dismissed the petitions filed under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 19731 seeking quashing of
criminal proceedings initiated against the appellants
herein.
3. The facts giving rise to the present appeals are as
follows:
3.1. FIR bearing Crime No.302 of 2023 dated
20.11.2023 (“1st FIR”) was registered at Mehunbare
Police Station, District Jalgaon under Sections 324, 141,
143, 147, 149, 452, 323, 504, and 506 of the Indian
Penal Code, 18602 against the appellants in SLP(Crl) No.
7212 of 2025.
1
2025 LiveLaw (SC) 710
-7-
NC: 2025:KHC:30816
CRL.P No. 11325 of 2025
HC-KAR
3.2. A second FIR bearing Crime No. 304 of 2023 dated
21.11.2023 (“2nd FIR”) was registered at the same
police station under Sections 376, 354-A, 354-D, 509,
and 506 IPC against the appellant in SLP(Crl) No.7495 of
2025, giving rise to Sessions Case No.29 of 2024.
3.3. The 1st FIR alleged that on 19.11.2023, the
appellants formed an unlawful assembly and assaulted
the complainant and her family members, including her
father Prabhakar (appellant in SLP(Crl) No.7495 of
2025), allegedly due to his role in causing the divorce of
one of the appellants.
3.4. The 2nd FIR, filed the following day, contained
grave allegations against Prabhakar, including sexual
assault and criminal intimidation. It was alleged that he
had sexually exploited the complainant over the time,
recorded videos of the act, and interfered with her
subsequent matrimonial alliances.
3.5. However, in March 2024, the complainant in the
2nd FIR filed an affidavit before the High Court
expressing her desire not to pursue the prosecution and
stating that she had no objection to grant of bail to the
accused. She further affirmed that the matter had been
amicably resolved, and she had received Rs.5,00,000/-
towards marriage-related expenses.
3.6. Based on the above, the appellants moved
Criminal Applications Nos.2561 and 2185 of 2024 before
the High Court under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing
of both FIRs. By a common order dated 07.03.2025, the
-8-
NC: 2025:KHC:30816
CRL.P No. 11325 of 2025
HC-KAR
High Court rejected both applications, holding that an
offence under Section 376 IPC being of a serious and
non-compoundable nature, could not be quashed merely
on the basis of a settlement or monetary compensation.
The Court concluded that the compromise could not form
the basis for quashing proceedings in such cases.
3.7. Aggrieved thereby, the appellants have
approached this Court.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
5. It is brought to our attention that both parties
have categorically taken the stand before this Court that
they have resolved their disputes amicably and are
desirous of moving on with their lives. The complainant
in the 2nd FIR, now married and residing with her
husband, has expressed that continuation of the
prosecution would cause further disruption in her
personal life and that she has no wish to support the
charges or pursue the matter any further.
6. At the outset, we recognise that the offence under
Section 376 IPC is undoubtedly of a grave and heinous
nature. Ordinarily, quashing of proceedings involving
such offences on the ground of settlement between the
parties is discouraged and should not be permitted
lightly. However, the power of the Court under Section
482 CrPC to secure the ends of justice is not constrained
by a rigid formula and must be exercised with reference
to the facts of each case.
-9-
NC: 2025:KHC:30816
CRL.P No. 11325 of 2025
HC-KAR
7. In the present matter, we are confronted with an
unusual situation where the FIR invoking serious
charges, including Section 376 IPC, was filed
immediately following an earlier FIR lodged by the
opposing side. This sequence of events lends a certain
context to the allegations and suggests that the second
FIR may have been a reactionary step. More importantly,
the complainant in the second FIR has unequivocally
expressed her desire not to pursue the case. She has
submitted that she is now married, settled in her
personal life, and continuing with the criminal
proceedings would only disturb her peace and stability.
Her stand is neither tentative nor ambiguous, she has
consistently maintained, including through an affidavit on
record, that she does not support the prosecution and
wants the matter to end. The parties have also amicably
resolved their differences and arrived at a mutual
understanding. In these circumstances, the continuation
of the trial would not serve any meaningful purpose. It
would only prolong distress for all concerned, especially
the complainant, and burden the Courts without the
likelihood of a productive outcome.
8. Therefore, having considered the peculiar facts
and circumstances of this case, and taking into account
the categorical stand taken by the complainant and the
nature of the settlement, we are of the opinion that the
continuation of the criminal proceedings would serve no
useful purpose and would only amount to abuse of
process.
– 10 –
NC: 2025:KHC:30816
CRL.P No. 11325 of 2025
HC-KAR
9. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed. The
impugned order of the High Court dated 07.03.2025 is
set aside. FIR No.302 of 2023 and FIR No.304 of 2023,
along with all proceedings arising therefrom, including
Sessions Case No.29 of 2024, stand quashed.
10. Pending applications, if any, are disposed of.”
5. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances
and the joint application and affidavit filed by the
complainant, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the petition
by quashing the impugned proceedings.
6. Accordingly, the petition is hereby disposed off.
7. In view of the joint application and the affidavit
filed by respondent No.2/complainant, the impugned
proceedings in C.C.No.26047/2025 pending on the file of the
VI Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru, are hereby
quashed.
Sd/-
(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR)
JUDGE
EM
Ct:vh
List No.: 19 Sl No.: 5
[ad_1]
Source link