- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238 CRL.P No. 102892 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102892 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS) BETWEEN: SADDAM HUSSAIN ALIAS SADDAM LIMBUWALE S/O. MOHAMMED FAROOQ LIMBUWALE AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: MECHANIC, R/O. NEAR VAISHNO DEVI TEMPLE, ISHWAR NAGAR, APMC, HUBBALLI-580025. …PETITIONER (BY SRI R.M.JAVED, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH APMC NAVNAGAR P.S., REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENCH AT DHARWAD-580001. 2. SMT. SANNA KARIYAVVA W/O. UMESH VALIKAR, AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. TALWAR ONI, AMARGOL, HUBBALLI-580025. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R-1, SRI ANWAR BASAH B., ADVOCATE FOR-2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (528 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS INSTITUTED AGAINST HIM IN CONNECTION WITH APMC NAVANAGAR P.S. CRIME NO.42/2024 NOW IN SPL.SC NO.45/2024 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 376, 504, 506 OF IPC AND SECTION 6 OF POCSO ACT AND SECTION 3(2)(V), 3(1)(r)(s) OF SC/ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPL.JUDGE, DHARWAD. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: RAKESH S HARIHAR Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238 CRL.P No. 102892 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) Petitioner is before this Court with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings in Special S.C. No.45 of 2024 pending before the Court of II Additional District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Dharwad arising out of Crime No.42 of 2024 registered by APMC Navanagar Police Station, Hubballi for offences punishable under Sections 376, 504, 506 of IPC, Section 6 of POCSO Act and Sections 3(2)(v), 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent No.2 jointly submit that dispute between the parties has been amicably settled at the intervention of elders and well wishers of both the parties. The parents and elders of both the parties have decided to perform the marriage of the petitioner with the victim girl, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238 CRL.P No. 102892 of 2025 who is now a major. They submit that petitioner is now aged 20 years 4 months and immediately after he attains the age of 21 years, the marriage of the petitioner and the victim will be performed and registered before the Jurisdictional Registrar of Marriages. They submit that parties are before this Court seeking permission of this Court to compound the offences and in support of their prayer, the petitioner and his father have filed their respective affidavits before this Court. They also submit that father of the victim girl has also filed his affidavit admitting the settlement between the parties. They submit that the settlement between the parties is voluntary without there being any undue influence and coercion and pendency of this case has been causing untold hardship to them and their relatives and they are not in a position to live a normal life. Accordingly, they pray to allow the petition. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238 CRL.P No. 102892 of 2025 4. Learned HCGP, however, has brought to the notice of this Court that charge sheet has been filed in the present case for non-compoundable offences. 5. The affidavits filed by the petitioner, his father and by the father of the victim are taken on record. In paragraph Nos.2 to 5 of the affidavit filed by the petitioner, it is stated as follows: “2. I state that I have filed the above petition seeking quashing of entire proceedings in connection with APMC Navanagar P.S. Crime No.42/2024 (Now Spl. S.C. No.45/2024) pending on the file of II Addl. Dist and Sessions Judge and Spl. Judge, Dharwad for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 376, 504, 506 of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act and Sections 3(2)(v), 3(1)(r)(s) of SC / ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, since I and the victim girl are getting married and have amicably resolved the issue. 3. I state that I and the victim girl are in relationship and we both have decided to go for marriage and for this my parents and parents of victim girl has consented to it. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238 CRL.P No. 102892 of 2025 4. I state that sine I am 20 years 4 months old and to get marriage register I should have completed 21 years of age, therefore for the registration of marriage we need to wait another 8 months. I state that as soon I complete the age of 21 years I undertake that, at earliest, in the presence of parents we will get out marriage registered. 5. I sate that, without fail, as soon as I complete the marriageable (21 years) age will get marriage register before the concerned authority. If I fail so, the respondent No.2 and victim girl may initiate proceedings against me according to law.” 6. In the affidavit of the father of the petitioner, the statements made by his son have been reiterated. The father of the victim girl has filed a separate affidavit which is also taken on record. In paragraph Nos.2 to 5 of the affidavit filed by the father of the victim girl, it is stated as follows: “2. I state that my wife (respondent No.2) is not keeping well and hence I am present before the court today and submitting this affidavit. The same may be considered and taken on record. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238 CRL.P No. 102892 of 2025 3. I state that the victim girl is our daughter and now she is 19 years old. I know the petitioner / accused. 4. I state that my daughter (victim girl) knows the petitioner / accused Saddam Limbuwale since few years and they both like each other and both have decided to go for marriage. I and my wife have consented for the same and the parents of petitioner / accused have also agreed for the same. 5. I state that since the accused and victim girl (my daughter) are in relationship and like each other, hence we have decided not to further process the matter and decided to bring to its logical end.” 7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 has held that power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is required to be exercised to secure the ends of justice and to prevent abuse of process of Court and these powers can be exercised to quash the legal proceedings or complaint or FIR in appropriate cases where the parties have settled their dispute and for that purpose any definite category of offence cannot be prescribed. In the case of Parbatbhai - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238 CRL.P No. 102892 of 2025 Aahir vs. State of Gujarat reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641 the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that the powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. are not restricted by the provisions outlined under Section 320 of Cr.P.C., which means, the High Court can exercise its inherent powers independently notwithstanding the limitations under Section 320 of Cr.P.C. A coordinate bench of this Court in almost identical circumstances in the case of Mohammad Waseem Ahamad vs. State reported in AIR Online 2022 KAR 314, in view of the settlement arrived between the parties after the accused and the victim got married and the victim had given birth to a child, has quashed the entire proceedings in the criminal case which was pending before the Special Court for similar offences. In the case of Aarush Jain vs. State of Karnataka and another (Crl.P. No.3710/2022 DD 09.09.2022) a coordinate bench of this Court has observed as follows: "xxxxxxxxxxx It is an admitted fact that the petitioner and the victim were close friends - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238 CRL.P No. 102892 of 2025 and were infatuated to each other. Several Courts as quoted hereinabove have considered the impact of hauling an under aged boy into the web of the provisions under the POCSO Act has clearly held that POCSO Act was not meant to punish the accused who were in love with the victims therein. 14. It is a known fact which bear consideration in the aforequoted judgments, in physiological parlance, that adolescence of a child is between 10 to 19 years and young age is said to be between 20 to 24 years. Therefore, adolescence is a continuum of development process in the life of a child metamorphosing into young age or an adult. It would not be inapt to notice that young children or boys who have not yet reached the age of 18 years, many a time, without realizing or being ignorant of the consequences of their act which they perform in the frenzy of youth, emerge themselves as offenders under the provisions of POCSO Act and face serious consequences. Romantic love between a boy and a girl of the age of adolescence sometimes arising out of infatuations result in the boy embroiling himself - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238 CRL.P No. 102892 of 2025 into the vortex of the provisions of the POCSO Act. 15. The laudable object for which the POCSO Act was brought into effect cannot be forgotten, but that would not mean that it is meant to punish young children who would fall in love and commit such acts which would become punishable under the Act, a caveat, this Court is not painting every incidence of sexual activity of any kind that would become an offence under the POCSO Act, with the same brush, but there are cases of the kind, like the one at hand, where the adolescents have indulged in such acts due to lack of knowledge of consequence of law. xxxxxxxxxxxx". 8. xxxxxxxxxxxx". 8. No doubt Section 376 of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act are non-compoundable under Section 320 of Cr.P.C., however, considering the observation made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh and Parbatbhai, that the powers of the High Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. are not restricted by the provisions of Section 320 of Cr.P.C. and the inherent powers under Section 482 - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238 CRL.P No. 102892 of 2025 of Cr.P.C. can be exercised to quash the FIR or criminal proceedings if this Court is of the considered opinion that continuation of the criminal case is not in the interest of the parties and on the other hand ends of justice would be secured if the criminal proceedings is quashed, notwithstanding the fact that alleged offences are non compoundable, still this Court in deserving cases can quash the entire proceedings. 9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramgopal and Another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in AIR 2022 (14) SCC 531 has held that even in cases involving non compoundable offences where compromise is voluntary and allegations are private in nature, extra ordinary powers of the High Court can be exercised beyond the metes and bounds of Section 320 of Cr.P.C.” 10. The High Court while exercising its powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., in a case involving non- - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238 CRL.P No. 102892 of 2025 compoundable offence, is required to take into consideration the gravity of offences and also the nature of offences. In addition to the same, the High Court is also required to take the nature of settlement between the parties. 11. In the present case, allegation against the petitioner is private in nature and material on record would go to show that petitioner and victim girl are in love. The dispute between the parties has been now amicably settled and the elders and family members of both the parties have decided to perform the marriage of the petitioner with the victim girl, who is now a major. This Court is required to exercise its discretion taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case surrounding the incident and also the background in which the settlement has been arrived between the parties. Considering the nature of allegations found against the petitioner and also the background in which the dispute has been settled between - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238 CRL.P No. 102892 of 2025 the parties, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case wherein this Court is required to exercise its inherent powers so as to secure the ends of justice to all the parties. Accordingly, the following: ORDER Criminal Petition is allowed. The entire proceedings in Special S.C. No.45 of 2024 pending before the Court of II Additional District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Dharwad arising out of Crime No.42 of 2024 registered by APMC Navanagar Police Station, Hubballi for offences punishable under Sections 376, 504, 506 of IPC, Section 6 of POCSO Act and Sections 3(2)(b), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the petitioner is quashed. Sd/- (S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE RSH CT:GSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 67