- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2244 CRL.P No. 100512 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100512 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)-) BETWEEN: VEERANNA, S/O. MADIVALAPPA MUGI, AGE. 29 YEARS, OCC. LABOURER, R/O. 1ST ONI, NICHANKI VILLAGE, T/Q. KITTUR, DIST. BELAGAVI 591 115 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. AVINASH M ANGADI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH DHARWAD RURAL POLICE STATION, REP BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD 580011. 2. BASAVARAJ, S/O. SHIVAPPA TALAVAR, AGE. 60 YEARS, OCC. LABOURER, R/O. INCHAL VILLAGE, T/Q. SAVADATTI, DIST. BELAGAVI- 591102. NOW AT. KYARAKOPP VILLAGE, T/Q. AND DIST: DHARWAD-580001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ASHOK T. KATTIMANI, AGA FOR R1 SRI. MAHANTESH S.HIREMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SE. 482 OF CR.P.C. (U/S. 528 OF BNSS, 2023) SEEKING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION AND QUASH THE COMPLAINT, FIR IN CRIME NO.0214/2024 REGISTERED BY DHARWAD RURAL POLICE PENDING BEFORE THE FILE IN THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE DHARWAD IN SPL. SC NO. 103/2024 FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/SEC. B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2025.02.07 16:07:55 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2244 CRL.P No. 100512 of 2025 137(2), 87, 351(3) OF BNS-2023 AND SEC. 12 OF POCSO ACT-2012, SEC. 3(2)(V-a) OF SC AND ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT- 1989 AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN SPL. SC.NO. 103/2024 PURSUANT TO THEREIN IN RESPECT OF THE PETITIONER HEREIN. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER The petitioner/accused, who is facing trial for offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and Section 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, is before this Court. 2. The prosecution alleges that the petitioner/accused was in a relationship with the survivor and, fully aware that the survivor was a minor and belonged to a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe community, on 25.09.2024, the petitioner/accused kidnapped the survivor and took her to Sankeshwar Town, Hukkeri, where he forcibly made the survivor stay with him for three days., and touched her inappropriately. 3. The petitioner/accused, the respondent No.2 (the de facto complainant, who is the grandfather of the survivor), and the survivor are present before this Court. 4. The petitioner/accused and respondent No.2 have filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS for compounding the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2244 CRL.P No. 100512 of 2025 offences, stating that they have amicably settled the matter. As per the settlement, the petitioner has agreed to marry the survivor once she attains the age of majority. Additionally, respondent No.2 has agreed to withdraw all allegations made against the petitioner/accused and has no objection to the quashing of the impugned proceedings. The application is perused. 5. The learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1 (State) submits that the alleged offences are heinous and constitute a crime against society, and, therefore, the offences cannot be compounded. He seeks the dismissal of the petition. 6. The survivor was approximately 16 years and 10 months old at the time of the incident, and as of today, she is 17 years and 2 months old. The prosecution alleges that the accused, after kidnapping the survivor, touched her inappropriately. However, there is no material to substantiate that the accused had engaged in forcible sexual intercourse with the survivor. Although the offences are non-cognizable, given that the parties have amicably resolved their dispute, it would be a futile exercise to subject the accused to trial. The probability of conviction is remote and bleak in light of the settlement and the absence of any medical evidence indicating that the accused subjected the survivor to sexual assault. 7. The object of the POCSO Act is to protect minors from sexual abuse and not to criminalize consensual relationships between two adolescents who may not fully understand the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2244 CRL.P No. 100512 of 2025 consequences of their actions. The petitioner and the survivor come from a lower socio-economic background, with limited access to information and knowledge, which deprived them of an understanding of the consequences of engaging in a consensual relationship. While having consensual sexual intercourse with a minor is an offence under the POCSO Act, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and in the interest of securing justice, it would be appropriate to quash the impugned proceedings. Otherwise, continuing the proceedings would result in a miscarriage of justice for the survivor. 8. In the light of the above, the impugned criminal proceedings are required to be quashed. Hence, I pass the following: ORDER i) Accordingly, the criminal petition is allowed. ii) The impugned criminal proceedings in Spl. S.C. No.103/2024 pending on the file of II Additional District & Sessions Judge, Dharwad, is hereby quashed. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE KMS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11