RAFIQ ALIAS MAHMADHANEEF vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17341
CRL.P No. 100229 of 2026
C/W CRL.P No. 100228 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020025932026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
TH
DATED THIS THE 16 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100229 OF 2026
(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)
C/W. CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100228 OF 2026
(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)
IN CRL.P No.100229/2026
BETWEEN:
MAHAMMED JAFAR HUSENMIYA NADAF,
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: EMPLOYEE IN PRIVATE FIRM,
RESIDING OF: NAREGAL VILLAGE,
TALUK: HANGAL, DISTRICT: HAVERI - 581 110.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI PRAKASH BADIGER, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
PSI, HAVERI WOMEN POLICE STATION,
HAVERI-581110, REPRESENTED BY SPP,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD - 580 011.
2. HONNAVVA W/O. GUDDAPPA KURUBAR,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: LABOURER,
RESIDING OF: KURABAGONDA VILLAGE,
NOW AT VIDYA NAGAR,
WEST SIDE HAVERI, HAVERI - 581110.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. M. C. HUKKERI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
Digitally signed by
CHANDRASHEKAR
LAXMAN
KATTIMANI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17341
CRL.P No. 100229 of 2026
C/W CRL.P No. 100228 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020025932026
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 528 OF
BNSS (U/S 482 OF CR.P.C.), PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER OF
COGNIZANCE DATED 26.12.2025 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, HAVERI AND ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS
AGAINST PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 IN C.C.NO.104/2025 NOW
COMMITED AS S.C.NO.89/2026 BEFORE THE ADDL. DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE AND FTSC-I HAVERI (HAVERI WOMEN POLICE
STATION CRIME NO.0090/2025) FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTION 376(2)(n), 420, 448, 504, 506, 506(2) READ WITH
SECTION 34 OF THE IPC.
IN CRL.P NO. 100228/2026
BETWEEN:
1. RAFIQ @ MAHMADHANEEF
HUSENSAB DODDADEVAR
AGD ABOUT 46 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: COOLIE,
2. MALLIK @ MALIKSAB HAJARESAB
DUNDIYAVAR NEGALUR,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: FARMER,
BOTH ARE RESIDING OF: NAREGAL VILLAGE,
TALUK: HANGAL,
DISTRICT: HAVERI - 581 110.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. PRAKASH BADIGER, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
PSI, HAVERI WOMEN POLICE STATION,
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17341
CRL.P No. 100229 of 2026
C/W CRL.P No. 100228 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020025932026
HAVERI - 581 110,
REPRESENTED BY SPP,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD - 580 011.
2. HONNAVVA W/O. GUDDAPPA KURUBAR,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: LABOURER,
RESIDING OF: KURABAGONDA VILLAGE,
NOW AT VIDYA NAGAR,
WEST SIDE,
HAVERI, HAVERI - 581 110.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. M.C.HUKKERI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 528 OF
BNSS (U/S 482 OF CR.P.C.) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER OF
COGNIZANCE DATED 26.12.2025 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, HAVERI AND ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS
AGAINST PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.2 TO 3 IN C.C.NO.104/2025
NOW COMMITTED AS S.C.NO.89/2026 PENDING ON THE FILE OF
ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND FTSC-I (HAVERI
WOMEN POLICE STATION CRIME NO.0090/2025) FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE 376(2)(n), 420, 448, 504 506(2) READ
WITH SECTION 34 OF IPC.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR FRESH MATTERS, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17341
CRL.P No. 100229 of 2026
C/W CRL.P No. 100228 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020025932026
ORAL ORDER
Crl.P.No.100229/2026 is filed by the petitioner/accused
No.1 and Crl.P.No.100228/2026 is filed by the
petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C./Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 seeking to quash the order
of cognizance dated 26.12.2025 passed by learned Prl. Civil
Judge(Sr.Dn.) & CJM, Haveri District, Haveri and entire
proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.1, 2 and 3 in
C.C.No.104/2025 pending on the file of learned Prl. Civil
Judge(Sr.Dn.) & CJM, Haveri District, Haveri for the offences
punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 420, 448, 504, 506(2)
read with section 34 of IPC.
2. In view of the settlement arrived at between the
parties, both the parties have filed I.A.No.3/2026 under Section
528 of BNSS, 2023 for compounding of offences alleged. The
I.A. is filed by both the parties, signed by them and their
respective counsels. Learned HCGP, defacto complainant,
petitioners/accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 and their respective
counsels are present. The contents of the applications and the
affidavits filed by the parties read as under:
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17341
CRL.P No. 100229 of 2026
C/W CRL.P No. 100228 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020025932026
AFFIDAVIT(for withdraw the complaint in
Crl.P.No.10229/2026)
Herein, I, Honnavva W/O Guddappa Kurabar, aged
32 YEARS, Occ: Coolie R/o.Kurubagouda Now at
Vidyanagar Pachim Badavane Haveri. Tq: & Dist:Haveri,
today at Dharwadd do hereby state on oath and making
solemn affirmation as under-
1. I am the Respondent No.2 in this case. I am
acquainted with the facts of the case. I am swearing this
affidavit is as under.
2. I submit that, I have lodged a criminal case against the
petitioner/accused and another 2 accused under section
376(2) (n), 420, 448, 504, 506(2), 34 of I.P.C. before the
jurisdictional police station. Based on complaint
jurisdiction police have filed charge sheet against the
accused/petitioner the same is submitted to the Principal
Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Haveri got registered
criminal case as C.C.No.104/2025 the same is pending for
consideration.
3. I submit that, in this case the notice was served upon
me then only I came to know this criminal petition filed by
the petitioner seeking quash the cognizance taken in
C.C.No.104/2025 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and
JMFC, Haveri dated 26/12/2025 against the petitioner on
various grounds.
4. I submit that, last 2 weeks back elders of the villagers
called me and advised me to withdraw my complaint
against the petitioner and also advised me that be happily
lived with your children by doing coolie in future if you
may come across any problem, we will be solved
amicably. I think for few days and realise myself that, the
villagers have rightly advised me. Accordingly, I decided
to withdraw my complaint against the petitioner/accused
with free consent, without anybody pressers, compulsion
or influence or threat.
5. I submit that, I request before this Hon'ble Court may
please to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17341
CRL.P No. 100229 of 2026
C/W CRL.P No. 100228 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020025932026
No.104/2025 pending on the file of Principal Senior Civil
Judge and JMFC Haveri by allowing this criminal petition
in the interest of justice and equity.
The above contents are read over to me in Kannada they
are true and correct to the best of my knowledge belief
and my personal information.
APPLICATION U/SEC. 528 OF BNSS - 2023
(in Crl.P.No.100229/2026)
Herein, the above-named Petitioners and Respondent
No.2 respectfully beg to submit and state as under-
1. That, the Petitioners have preferred the top-noted
Criminal Petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) (Note: Formerly
Section 482 of Cr.P.C.), seeking to quash the entire
criminal proceedings pending against them in
S.C.No.89/2026 on the file of the learned Additional
District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I, Haveri, arising out of
C.C. No.104/2025 (originating from Haveri Women Police
Station Crime No. 0056/2025) for offences punishable
under Sections 376(2)(n), 420, 448, 504, 506(2) read
with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
2. That, the criminal law machinery was set in motion
based on a complaint filed by Respondent No.2 herein,
who is the de-facto complainant in the case.
3. That, during the pendency of the above-mentioned
proceedings, well-wishers and elders of the village
intervened to mediate between the parties. With their
assistance, the Petitioners and Respondent No.2 have
amicably resolved and settled all their mutual disputes
and grievances exterior to the court.
4. That, Respondent No.2 has entered into this
compromise voluntarily, out of her own free will, and
without any element of force, coercion, undue influence,
or duress. She no longer nurtures any grievance against
the Petitioners and has no objection to the quashing of
the criminal proceedings pending against them.
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17341
CRL.P No. 100229 of 2026
C/W CRL.P No. 100228 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020025932026
5. That, although certain offences alleged against the
Petitioners are non-compoundable in nature, the parties
have completely restored harmony and settled the matter
entirely. Continuing the criminal prosecution would place
an undue burden on the parties, yield no fruitful purpose,
and result in an abuse of the process of the court.
PRAYER
Wherefore, the Petitioners/Accused No.1, 2 and 3,
and Respondent No.2 jointly pray that this Honorable
Court may be pleased to take this Joint Memorandum of
Compromise on record, allow the Criminal Petition, and
quash the entire proceedings against the
Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 in S.C.No.89/2026 pending
before the Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I,
Haveri, in the interest of justice.
AFFIDAVIT
HEREIN, I, MAHAMMED JAFAR HUSENMIYA NADAF,
AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: EMPLOYEE IN PRIVATE FIRM,
R/O.NAREGAL VILLAGE, TALLUK: HANGAL, DIST: HAVERI,
PIN:-581110, TODAY AT DHARWAD DO HEREBY STATE
ON OATH AS UNDER-
1. I state that, I am petitioner/accused No.1 in the above
stated Petition. I am conversant with the facts of the
above Petition. I am swearing to the contents of this
affidavit on behalf of me.
2. I state that, to avoid repetition of facts, the contents of
Petition may kindly be treated as part and parcel of this
affidavit.
3. It is submitted that, the contents of application are true
and correct.
Wherefore, it is humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court
be pleased to allow the annexed application, to meet the
ends of justice.
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17341
CRL.P No. 100229 of 2026
C/W CRL.P No. 100228 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020025932026
AFFIDAVIT
(FOR WITHDRAW THE COMPLAINT IN
Crl.P.No.100228/2026)
HEREIN, I, Honnavva W/O Guddappa Kurabar, aged 32
years, Occ: Coolie R/O.Kurubagoud Now At Vidyanagar
Pachim Badavane Haveri. Tq: & Dist:Haveri, today at
Dharwad do hereby state on oath and making solemn
affirmation as under-
1. I am the Respondent No.2 in this case. I am
acquainted with the facts of the case. I am swearing this
affidavit is as under.
2. I submit that, I have lodged a criminal case against the
petitioner/accused and another 2 accused under section
376(2) (n), 420, 448, 504, 506(2), 34 of I.P.C. before the
jurisdictional police station. Based on complaint
jurisdiction police have filed charge sheet against the
accused/petitioner the same is submitted to the Principal
Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Haveri got registered
criminal case as C.C.No.104/2025 the same is pending for
consideration.
3. I submit that, in this case the notice was served upon
me then only I came to know this criminal petition filed by
the petitioner seeking quash the cognizance taken in
C.C.No.104/2025 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and
JMFC, Haveri dated 26/12/2025 against the petitioner on
various grounds.
4. I submit that, last 2 weeks back elders of the villagers
called me and advised me to withdraw my complaint
against the petitioners/accused No.2 and 3 and also
advised me that be happily lived with your children by
doing coolie in future if you may come across any
problem, we will be solved your problem. After some time
I realise myself that, the villagers have rightly advised
me. Accordingly, I decided myself to withdraw my
complaint against the petitioners/accused No.2 and 3 with
free consent, without anybody pressers, compulsion or
influence or threat.
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17341
CRL.P No. 100229 of 2026
C/W CRL.P No. 100228 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020025932026
5. I submit that, I request before this Hon'ble Court may
please to quash the entire proceedings in
C.C.No.104/2025 pending on the file of Principal Senior
Civil Judge and JMFC Haveri by allowing this criminal
petition in the interest of justice and equity.
The above contents are read over to me in Kannada they
are true and correct to the best of my knowledge belief
and my personal information.
APPLICATION U/SEC. 528 OF BNSS - 2023
(in Crl.P.No.100228/2026)
Herein, the above-named Petitioners and Respondent
No.2 respectfully beg to submit and state as under-
1. That, the Petitioners have preferred the top-noted
Criminal Petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) (Note: Formerly
Section 482 of Cr.P.C.), seeking to quash the entire
criminal proceedings pending against them in
S.C.No.89/2026 on the file of the learned Additional
District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I, Haveri, arising out of
C.C. No.104/2025 (originating from Haveri Women Police
Station Crime No. 0056/2025) for offences punishable
under Sections 376(2)(n), 420, 448, 504, 506(2) read
with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
2. That, the criminal law machinery was set in motion
based on a complaint filed by Respondent No.2 herein,
who is the de-facto complainant in the case.
3. That, during the pendency of the above-mentioned
proceedings, well-wishers and elders of the village
intervened to mediate between the parties. With their
assistance, the Petitioners and Respondent No.2 have
amicably resolved and settled all their mutual disputes
and grievances exterior to the court.
4. That, Respondent No.2 has entered into this
compromise voluntarily, out of her own free will, and
without any element of force, coercion, undue influence,
or duress. She no longer nurtures any grievance against
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17341
CRL.P No. 100229 of 2026
C/W CRL.P No. 100228 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020025932026
the Petitioners and has no objection to the quashing of
the criminal proceedings pending against them.
5. That, although certain offences alleged against the
Petitioners are non-compoundable in nature, the parties
have completely restored harmony and settled the matter
entirely. Continuing the criminal prosecution would place
an undue burden on the parties, yield no fruitful purpose,
and result in an abuse of the process of the court.
PRAYER
Wherefore, the Petitioners/Accused No.1, 2 and 3,
and Respondent No.2 jointly pray that this Honorable
Court may be pleased to take this Joint Memorandum of
Compromise on record, allow the Criminal Petition, and
quash the entire proceedings against the
Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 in S.C.No.89/2026 pending
before the Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I,
Haveri, in the interest of justice.
AFFIDAVIT
HEREIN, I, RAFIQ @ MAHMADHANEEF HUSENSAB
DODDADEVAR HAMMED JAFAR HUSENMIYA NADAF, AGE:
46 YEARS, OCC: COOLI R/O.NAREGAL VILLAGE, TALLUK:
HANGAL, DIST: HAVERI, PIN:- 581110, TODAY AT
DHARWAD DO HEREBY STATE ON OATH AS UNDER-
1. I state that I am petitioner/Accused 2 in the above
stated Petition. I am conversant with the facts of the
above Petition. I am swearing to the contents of this
affidavit on behalf of me.
2. I state that, to avoid repetition of facts, the contents of
Petition may kindly be treated as part and parcel of this
affidavit.
3. It is submitted that the contents of application are true
and correct.
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17341
CRL.P No. 100229 of 2026
C/W CRL.P No. 100228 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020025932026
Wherefore, it is humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court be
pleased to allow the annexed application to meet the ends
of justice.
AFFIDAVIT
HEREIN, I, MALLIK @ MALIKSAB HAJARESAB AGE: 45
YEARS, OCC: FORMER DUNDIYAVAR TALLUK: HANGAL,
DIST: R/O.NAREGAL VILLAGE, HAVERI, PIN:-581110,
TODAY AT DHARWAD DO HEREBY STATE ON OATH AS
UNDER-
1. I state that I am petitioner/Accused No.3 in the above
stated Petition. I am conversant with the facts of the
above Petition. I am swearing to the contents of this
affidavit on behalf of me.
2. I state that, to avoid repetition of facts, the contents of
Petition may kindly be treated as part and parcel of this
affidavit.
3. It is submitted that, the contents of application are true
and correct.
Wherefore, it is humbly prayed that, this Hon'ble Court be
pleased to allow the annexed application to meet the ends
of justice.
AFFIDAVIT
Herein I, Sri, Honnavva W/o Guddappa Kurabar, aged
32 years, Oсс: Coolie R/o: Kurabgond Now at Vidyanagar
Pachim Badavane Haveri. Tq: & Dist: Haveri, today at
Dharwadd, do hereby state on oath as under-
1. I state that I am respondent No.2/complainant in the
above stated petition. I am conversant with the facts of
the above Petition. I am swearing to the contents of this
affidavit on behalf of me.
2. I state that, to avoid repetition of facts, the contents of
Petition may kindly be treated as part and parcel of this
affidavit.
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17341
CRL.P No. 100229 of 2026
C/W CRL.P No. 100228 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020025932026
3. It is submitted that, the contents of application are true
and correct.
Wherefore, it is humbly prayed that, this Hon'ble
Court be pleased to allow the annexed application to meet
the ends of justice.
.
3 Perused the complaint, FIR, I.A. and the charge
sheet. The allegations made in the complaint show that
there was a dispute between the de facto complainant and
the accused persons, and the same is settled as per the
advice of the elders of both the families without any
compulsion or coercion. Therefore, continuation of the
prosecution against the petitioners is not at all necessary
and that would be nothing but an abuse of process of law.
Since the alleged offences are non-compoundable in
nature, the accused and the defacto complainant prayed to
quash the proceedings and permit them to compound the
offences.
4. As the matter is settled between the parties, it is
just and necessary to invoke Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to
quash the proceedings.
- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17341
CRL.P No. 100229 of 2026
C/W CRL.P No. 100228 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020025932026
5. Since the parties have settled the matter between
themselves, the chances of conviction is very remote, and
therefore, it would be unnecessary to drag the
proceedings.
6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Narinder Singh & Ors vs State Of Punjab & Anr
reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466 at Para Nos.31 to 35 has
held as under:
" 31. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we sum up and
lay down the following principles by which the High Court
would be guided in giving adequate treatment to the
settlement between the parties and exercising its power
under Section 482 of the Code while accepting the
settlement and quashing the proceedings or refusing to
accept the settlement with direction to continue with the
criminal proceedings:
(I) Power conferred under Section 482 of the Code is to
be distinguished from the power which lies in the Court to
compound the offences under Section 320 of the Code. No
doubt, under Section 482 of the Code, the High Court has
inherent power to quash the criminal proceedings even in
those cases which are not compoundable, where the
parties have settled the matter between themselves.
However, this power is to be exercised sparingly and with
caution.
(II) When the parties have reached the settlement and on
that basis petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is
filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure:
- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17341
CRL.P No. 100229 of 2026
C/W CRL.P No. 100228 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020025932026
(i) ends of justice, or
(ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court.
While exercising the power the High Court is to form an
opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives.
(III) Such a power is not be exercised in those
prosecutions which involve heinous and serious offences
of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity,
etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a
serious impact on society. Similarly, for offences alleged
to have been committed under special statute like the
Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by
Public Servants while working in that capacity are not to
be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between
the victim and the offender.
(IV) On the other, those criminal cases having
overwhelmingly and pre-dominantly civil character,
particularly those arising out of commercial transactions
or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family
disputes should be quashed when the parties have
resolved their entire disputes among themselves.
(V) While exercising its powers, the High Court is to
examine as to whether the possibility of conviction is
remote and bleak and continuation of criminal cases
would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice
and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not
quashing the criminal cases.
(VI) Offences under Section 307 IPC would fall in the
category of heinous and serious offences and therefore is
to be generally treated as crime against the society and
not against the individual alone. However, the High Court
would not rest its decision merely because there is a
mention of Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is
framed under this provision. It would be open to the High
Court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section
307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has
collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead
to proving the charge under Section 307 IPC. For this
- 15 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17341
CRL.P No. 100229 of 2026
C/W CRL.P No. 100228 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020025932026
purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the
nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted
on the vital/delegate parts of the body, nature of weapons
used etc. Medical report in respect of injuries suffered by
the victim can generally be the guiding factor. On the
basis of this prima facie analysis, the High Court can
examine as to whether there is a strong possibility of
conviction or the chances of conviction are remote and
bleak. In the former case it can refuse to accept the
settlement and quash the criminal proceedings whereas in
the later case it would be permissible for the High Court
to accept the plea compounding the offence based on
complete settlement between the parties. At this stage,
the Court can also be swayed by the fact that the
settlement between the parties is going to result in
harmony between them which may improve their future
relationship.
(VII) While deciding whether to exercise its power under
Section 482 of the Code or not, timings of settlement play
a crucial role. Those cases where the settlement is arrived
at immediately after the alleged commission of offence
and the matter is still under investigation, the High Court
may be liberal in accepting the settlement to quash the
criminal proceedings/investigation. It is because of the
reason that at this stage the investigation is still on and
even the charge sheet has not been filed. Likewise, those
cases where the charge is framed but the evidence is yet
to start or the evidence is still at infancy stage, the High
Court can show benevolence in exercising its powers
favourably, but after prima facie assessment of the
circumstances/material mentioned above. On the other
hand, where the prosecution evidence is almost complete
or after the conclusion of the evidence the matter is at
the stage of argument, normally the High Court should
refrain from exercising its power under Section 482 of the
Code, as in such cases the trial court would be in a
position to decide the case finally on merits and to come a
conclusion as to whether the offence under Section 307
IPC is committed or not. Similarly, in those cases where
the conviction is already recorded by the trial court and
the matter is at the appellate stage before the High Court,
mere compromise between the parties would not be a
- 16 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17341
CRL.P No. 100229 of 2026
C/W CRL.P No. 100228 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020025932026
ground to accept the same resulting in acquittal of the
offender who has already been convicted by the trial
court. Here charge is proved under Section 307 IPC and
conviction is already recorded of a heinous crime and,
therefore, there is no question of sparing a convict found
guilty of such a crime.
32. After having clarified the legal position in the manner
aforesaid, we proceed to discuss the case at hand.
33. In the present case, FIR No.121 dated 14.7.2010 was
registered under Sections 307, 324, 323, 34 IPC.
Investigation was completed, whereafter challan was
presented in the court against the petitioner herein.
Charges have also been framed; the case is at the stage
of recording of evidence. At this juncture, parties entered
into compromise on the basis of which petition under
Section 482 of the Code was filed by the petitioners
namely the accused persons for quashing of the criminal
proceedings under the said FIR. As per the copy of the
settlement which was annexed along with the petition, the
compromise took place between the parties on 12.7.2013
when respectable members of the Gram Panchayat held a
meeting under the Chairmanship of Sarpanch. It is stated
that on the intervention of the said persons/Panchayat,
both the parties were agreed for compromise and have
also decided to live with peace in future with each other.
It was argued that since the parties have decided to keep
harmony between the parties so that in future they are
able to live with peace and love and they are the
residents of the same village, the High Court should have
accepted the said compromise and quash the
proceedings.
34. We find from the impugned order that the sole reason
which weighed with the High Court in refusing to accept
the settlement between the parties was the nature of
injuries. If we go by that factor alone, normally we would
tend to agree with the High Court's approach. However,
as pointed out hereinafter, some other attendant and
inseparable circumstances also need to be kept in mind
which compel us to take a different view.
- 17 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17341
CRL.P No. 100229 of 2026
C/W CRL.P No. 100228 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020025932026
35. We have gone through the FIR as well which was
recorded on the basis of statement of the
complainant/victim. It gives an indication that the
complainant was attacked allegedly by the accused
persons because of some previous dispute between the
parties, though nature of dispute etc. is not stated in
detail. However, a very pertinent statement appears on
record viz., "respectable persons have been trying for a
compromise up till now, which could not be finalized".
This becomes an important aspect. It appears that there
have been some disputes which led to the aforesaid
purported attack by the accused on the complainant. In
this context when we find that the elders of the village,
including Sarpanch, intervened in the matter and the
parties have not only buried their hatchet but have
decided to live peacefully in future, this becomes an
important consideration. The evidence is yet to be led in
the Court. It has not even started. In view of compromise
between parties, there is a minimal chance of the
witnesses coming forward in support of the prosecution
case. Even though nature of injuries can still be
established by producing the doctor as witness who
conducted medical examination, it may become difficult to
prove as to who caused these injuries. The chances of
conviction, therefore, appear to be remote. It would,
therefore, be unnecessary to drag these proceedings. We,
taking all these factors into consideration cumulatively,
are of the opinion that the compromise between the
parties be accepted and the criminal proceedings arising
out of FIR No.121 dated 14.7.2010 registered with Police
Station LOPOKE, District Amritsar Rural be quashed. We
order accordingly."
7. On perusal of the aforesaid decision, facts and
circumstances and the material available on record, it appears
that respondent No.2 defacto complainant had filed the cases
against the petitioners alleging that petitioner/accused No.1 is
- 18 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17341
CRL.P No. 100229 of 2026
C/W CRL.P No. 100228 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020025932026
a relative of one Smt. Shanminabanu, who resided in the
neighbourbood of the complainant's house and accused No.1
approached the defacto complainant(who was a widow) with a
marriage proposal and on 09.08.2019, at about 1.00 p.m.,
while the complainant was alone in the house, accused No.1
trespassed into her house and forcibly had sexual intercourse
with her and accused No.1 threatened her with dire
consequences if the incident was disclosed to anyone and when
the complainant approached the elders of the village, petitioner
and accused Nos.2 and 3 abused her in filthy language and
threatened her. Hence, the defacto complainant was
constrained to lodge a complaint. Now the petitioners and the
2nd respondent have amicably settled the disputes and now
intend to compromise the matter and, hence, respondent
No.2/de-facto complainant is intending to take back the cases
registered against the petitioners. In this context, the Court
finds that, the parties have settled their disputes. This becomes
an important consideration. In view of the compromise held
between the parties, further investigation of the cases would
not arise and if investigation is completed and charge sheet has
- 19 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17341
CRL.P No. 100229 of 2026
C/W CRL.P No. 100228 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020025932026
been filed by investigating officer even at that juncture also,
there is a minimal chance of the witnesses coming forward in
support of the prosecution case. Thus, the chances of
conviction, therefore, appears to be very remote. It would,
therefore, be unnecessary to drag these proceedings. When the
Court takes all these factors into consideration cumulatively,
the Court is of the opinion that the compromise between the
parties be accepted and the criminal proceedings initiated
against the petitioners/accused is liable to be quashed.
Hence, the compromise petitions is accepted. In view of
settlement arrived at between the parties and in view of the
ratio laid down in the decision cited supra, it is necessary to
permit the parties to quash the proceedings against the
petitioners.
Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
1. The Criminal Petitions are allowed .
- 20 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17341
CRL.P No. 100229 of 2026
C/W CRL.P No. 100228 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020025932026
2. The order of cognizance dated 26.12.2025 passed
by learned Prl. Civil Judge(Sr.Dn.) & CJM, Haveri
District, Haveri and entire proceedings against the
petitioner/accused No.1, 2 and 3 in
C.C.No.104/2025 pending on the file of learned Prl.
Civil Judge(Sr.Dn.) & CJM, Haveri District, Haveri
for the offences punishable under Sections
376(2)(n), 420, 448, 504, 506(2) read with section
34 of IPC against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 4
is hereby quashed .
3. I.A. No.3/2026 is allowed accordingly.
Pending I.A.s, if any, stand disposed of as they do not
survive for consideration.
Sd/-
(VENKATESH NAIK T)
JUDGE
MN
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39