Facts
The petitioners sought to quash the respondent’s proceedings under Sections 12, 17, 18, 19, 20 and 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, pending before the JMFC (Traffic Court–5), Bengaluru
Source reference: p. 2–3The dispute arose from the parties’ marriage; the first petitioner and respondent had also pursued divorce proceedings, which were referred to mediation.
Source reference: p. 3–6Under their settlement, the first petitioner agreed to pay the respondent ₹10,00,000 as full and final alimony, and the respondent agreed to withdraw the domestic-violence proceedings
Source reference: p. 3–6The joint affidavit stated that the full amount had been paid, the marriage had been dissolved by decree, and the respondent voluntarily consented to quashing the pending proceedings
Source reference: p. 9–11Issues
1. Whether the pending proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act should be quashed in light of the parties’ settlement and the respondent’s consent
Source reference: p. 11–122. Whether the criminal petition should be disposed of on the basis of that settlement.
Source reference: p. 11Law Applied
The petition invoked the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (and was described as having been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure)
Source reference: p. 2, 10The proceedings sought to be quashed arose under Sections 12, 17, 18, 19, 20 and 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005
Source reference: p. 2–3, 12The Court also noted the parties’ mediated settlement under Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, read with Rule 24 of the Karnataka Civil Procedure (Mediation) Rules, 2005.
Source reference: p. 3The order cites no precedent and sets out no further general test for quashing on settlement.
Source reference: no citationReasoning
The Court considered the mediated settlement, the joint affidavit, the respondent’s express consent, payment of the agreed alimony, and the decree dissolving the marriage.
Source reference: p. 3–11In view of those circumstances, it disposed of the petition on the basis of the settlement and quashed the Domestic Violence Act proceedings insofar as they concerned the petitioners.
Source reference: p. 11–12Holding
The Court disposed of the criminal petition in view of the settlement and joint affidavit, and quashed the proceedings in Crl. Misc. No. 12/2025 under Sections 12, 17, 18, 19, 20 and 22 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, insofar as the petitioners were concerned
Acts & Sections Cited
16 provisions across 7 statutes referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 19731
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20231
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 20056
Code of Civil Procedure, 19081
Hindu Marriage Act, 19551
Indian Penal Code, 18604
Original Court PDF
SRI POOJITH AvsSMT ASHWINI MG
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
