After Mutual Divorce Settlement, Karnataka HC Quashes Husband’s 498A, 307 Case As Ex-Wife No Longer Seeks Prosecution

Respondent No. 2, the petitioner’s father-in-law, lodged a complaint alleging cruelty and harassment and an assault by the petitioner, leading to registration of Crime No. 203/2022 for offences under Sections 307, 498-A, 504, 109 and 34 IPC.

A chargesheet was filed, and proceedings were pending as S.C. No. 1918/2022.

The petitioner and his wife, K. Archana, later settled their matrimonial disputes, obtained a divorce by mutual consent, and sought quashing of the criminal proceedings.

The settlement terms were acted upon, including payment of ₹15,50,000 and execution of gift deeds.

Archana appeared before the Court, affirmed that the settlement was voluntary and complied with, acknowledged that an assault had occurred, and stated that she did not wish to pursue the prosecution.

Whether the High Court should exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS to quash the proceedings under Sections 307 and 498-A IPC in light of the parties’ matrimonial settlement and the victim’s request not to pursue the case.

Whether continuation of the criminal proceedings, despite the settlement and its implementation, would serve the ends of justice.

The Court invoked Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, as preserving the High Court’s inherent power to give effect to orders under the Sanhita, prevent abuse of the process of any court, and secure the ends of justice.

It held that this power may be exercised to quash criminal proceedings arising from matrimonial discord where the dispute has been amicably resolved and the circumstances justify quashing, notwithstanding the nature of the offences alleged.

The Court recognized the serious nature of the alleged offences but considered that the prosecution arose from matrimonial discord, the marriage had been dissolved by mutual consent, and the settlement had been implemented.

Archana confirmed that the settlement was voluntary, acknowledged the assault, and did not wish to pursue the prosecution.

In those circumstances, the Court concluded that continuing the proceedings would prolong discord without advancing the ends of justice, and that quashing was warranted under its inherent jurisdiction.