ANUPAMA. K vs POORNIMA. K

Court
Karnataka High Court

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57470
WP No. 25062 of 2023


CNR: KAHC010586232023




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

TH
DATED THIS THE 12 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026


BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

WRIT PETITION No.25062 OF 2023 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

1. ANUPAMA. K
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
W/O ASHOKA,
R/O 1-11, KEDILA,
SULLAI TALUK, KALANJA,
DAKSHIN KANNADA-574 212.

2. ASHOKA. K
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
S/O. GOPALAKRISHNA,
R/O KEDLA,
SULLIA TALLUKU,
KALANJA,
DAKSHIN KANNADA-574 212.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI SACHIN B S, ADVOCATE)











Digitally
signed by R
MANJUNATHA
Location:
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA
AND:

POORNIMA. K
D/O T.G.VENKATAMANA BHAT,
W/O SUNIL.A,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
RESIDING AT SHREE NIVASA HOUSE,
KADIRADKA,
PERABE POST AND VILLAGE, KADABA TALUK,
DAKSHINA KANNADA-574 285.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. KESHAVA BHAT A, ADVOCATE)

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57470
WP No. 25062 of 2023


CNR: KAHC010586232023


THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 482
CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CRL.MISC.NO.23 OF 2023 ON THE
FILE OF PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, PUTTUR, DAKSHINA
KANNADA DISTRICT REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE U/S 19,
20, 22 AND 23 OF PROTECTION OF WOMEN FROM DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE ACT, 2005 AS PER ANNEXURE-A IN SO FOR AS
PETITIONER ARE CONCERNED.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

ORAL ORDER

Heard Sri B.S.Sachin, learned counsel for the petitioners
and Sri A.Keshava Bhat, learned counsel for the respondent.


2. Petitioners are respondent Nos.3 and 4 in Crl.Misc. No.
23/2023 pending on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and
JMFC, Putturu, Dakshina Kannada, filed for the offence
punishable under Sections 19, 20, 22, 23 of the Protection of
Women from Domestic Violence Act (hereinafter referred to as
‘D.V Act’).


3. Petitioners are in custody of the minor child belonging to
respondent and her husband Sri Sunil. There were some
differences with regard to custody of the child.

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57470
WP No. 25062 of 2023


CNR: KAHC010586232023



4. In that regard, a writ petition was filed before this Court.
A compromise petition came to be filed in WPHC No.24/2020
which came to be disposed of on 07.07.2020.


5. As per the compromise petition, child was given custody
to these petitioners.


6. There was an application filed seeking modification in the
said Order dated 07.07.2020 vide I.A.No.2/2020. Said
application was considered by the Division Bench presided over
by Hon’ble The Chief Justice. By the Order dated 19.11.2020,
said application came to be dismissed with liberty for the
aggrieved party to approach the jurisdictional Court for
obtaining custody of the child.


7. Perhaps taking advantage of the observations made in
paragraph 8 of the said order dated 19.11.2020, the
respondent herein approached the Court at Putturu under the
provisions of D.V Act.


8. The grievance of the petitioners herein is that, no
provisions of D.V Act have been violated so that the Court at

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57470
WP No. 25062 of 2023


CNR: KAHC010586232023


Putturu can entertain further. The petition filed under the
aforesaid provisions of the D.V Act in Crl. Misc. No.23/2023
itself is abuse of process of law and thus sought for quashing of
the pending proceedings.


9. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court
noted that there are differences between the respondent and
her husband-Sri Sunil.


10. In respect of the minor child, already proceedings have
taken place in the form of a Writ Petition Habeas Corpus
referred to supra.


11. However, while passing the orders on I.A.No.2/2020 on
19.11.2020 the Division Bench of this Court in paragraph 8 has
held as under:
“Notwithstanding the order passed in the writ petition on
the basis of the joint memo of compromise, it is always
open for the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings
before the competent Court for seeking custody of the
minor child. The petitioner can always seek appropriate
interim relief regarding interim custody or grant of
visitation rights in such proceedings.”


- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57470
WP No. 25062 of 2023


CNR: KAHC010586232023



12. Pursuant to said observations, present petition in
Crl.Misc.No.23/2023 came to be filed.


13. The grievance of the petitioners is that they are in legal
custody of the child pursuant to the order passed by the
Division Bench of this Court acting under the Joint Memo filed
in the said case and if any action is to be initiated, it is not by
approaching the Court under the provisions of D.V Act and
suitable proceedings are to be initiated.


14. In this regard, Sri Sachin would contend that the
provisions of D.V Act would not contemplate the prayer for
custody of child, having regard to the specific provisions of the
D.V Act.


15. In this regard, he places reliance on the judgment of the
Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Sham @ Navnath
Vasantro Kumbhakarna and others vs. Sau Yogita and
another reported in 2018 SCC OnLine Bom 1868.


16. Per contra, Sri Keshava Bhat, learned counsel for the
respondent would contend that petitioners are yet to appear

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57470
WP No. 25062 of 2023


CNR: KAHC010586232023


before the Court at Putturu and if they file any objections to the
main petition, same would be considered by the Court in
accordance with law.


17. At that juncture, respondent will have a say in the matter
as to the maintainability of the petition as well and thus sought
for dismissal of the writ petition.


18. Having heard the arguments of both sides this Court
perused the material on record meticulously.


19. On such perusal of the material on record, taking note of
the relevant provisions of the D.V Act, if the petitioners herein
appear before the Court at Putturu and by filing the statement
of objections raise an issue with regard to the very
maintainability of the petition having regard to the prayer made
in the petition as well as the custody of the child that has been
held by these petitioners pursuant to the compromise petition
in the aforesaid Writ Petition Habeas Corpus, the Trial
Magistrate is bound to take into consideration the very
maintainability of the petition and pass suitable orders.

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57470
WP No. 25062 of 2023


CNR: KAHC010586232023



20. However, if the petitioners suffer an adverse order, they
are entitled to challenge the same in accordance with law.


21. With that observation petition stands disposed of .

Sd/-
(V SRISHANANDA)
JUDGE

kcm
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 75
CT:VRR