Mediation Process Can't Be Used As Ruse To Secure Adjournments: Karnataka High Court Dismisses Husband's Plea To Quash Cruelty Case

The Karnataka High Court has held that a party cannot invoke mediation process as a ruse to secure adjournments and delay proceedings by deliberately failing to participate. It thus dismissed the plea to quash criminal proceedings against the petitioner in a dowry harassment case.

Justice Suraj Govindaraj observed that once the parties consent to refer a dispute to mediation, they are duty-bound to participate in the proceedings sincerely and diligently. The petitioner cannot thereafter frustrate the process by remaining absent, the Court said.

“Though the petitioner appeared before the mediator on the first occasion, the petitioner remained absent on the subsequent two occasions, despite the respondent being present. This repeated absence, without any satisfactory explanation, makes it evident that the petitioner did not intend to pursue the mediation process in good faith,” the Court observed.

It added, “The conduct of the petitioner clearly indicates that the reference to mediation was used as a ruse to secure an adjournment and delay the proceedings before this Court, rather than as a genuine attempt to arrive at an amicable settlement.”

The Court stated that the mediation process in not a mere device to seek adjournments at the convenience of the litigant.

“Such conduct undermines the sanctity of the mediation process and the confidence that the Court places in parties when referring matters for an amicable resolution. It also results in the wastage of judicial time and the time and effort of the mediator and the other party, who has attended the proceedings in the expectation that the reference would be pursued in good faith,” Justice Govindaraj said.

Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the petition, observing, “the petitioner is not entitled to any further indulgence or equitable consideration.”

The petitioner husband, had approached the High Court seeking to quash the proceedings initiated against him by the wife for the offences under Sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 498(A) (husband or relative of husband subjecting woman to cruelty), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), and 506 (criminal intimidation)  IPC, along with Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

The matter had been referred to mediation with the consent of both parties to resolve the dispute amicably. However, the petitioner remained absent during subsequent mediation sessions.