- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6734 CRL.P No. 102420 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.102420 OF 2024 BETWEEN: KAPPATTAPPA S/O. SHIVALINGAPPA HANCHINAL, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: SUB-REGISTRAR (HUBBALLI NORTH), REGISTRAR OF MARRIAGE, VIDYANAGAR, HUBBALLI, PERMANENT R/O: NARAYANPUR, KOTUMACHAGI, SHIRAHATTI, DIST: GADAG – 551 102. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. IRANAGOUDA K. KABBUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH VIDYANAGAR POLICE STATION, REPT. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DIST: DHARWAD – 580 021. 2. VARUN S/O. MARUTI BHAJANTRI, AGE: 22 YEARS OCC: LABOURER, R/O: GANGADHAR NAGAR, SETTLEMENT, 8TH CROSS, HUBBALLI, TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD – 580 025. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAMESH B. CHIGARI, AGA FOR R1; R2- SERVED) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. (528 OF BNSS) SEEKING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT AND FIR AGAINST THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 IN VIDYANAGAR P.S. CRIME NO.79/2024 FOR THE OFFENCES UNDER SECTION 11 OF PROHIBITION OF CHILD MARRIAGE ACT 2006, PENDING ON THE FILE OF I ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) COURT, HUBBALLI, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. Digitally signed by YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6734 CRL.P No. 102420 of 2024 THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by accused No.1 under Section 528 of BNSS praying to quash the complaint and FIR in Crime No.79/2024 of Vidyanagar P.S registered for offence punishable under Section 11 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for short). 2. Respondent No.2 has lodged a complaint and a case came to be registered on the basis of the said complaint in Crime No.79/2024 of Vidyanagar P.S. against the petitioner-Sub-Registrar and Registrar of Marriage (Hubballi North) for offence punishable under Section 11 of the Act. The said FIR and complaint has been sought to be quashed by petitioner/accused No.1 in this petition. 3. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6734 CRL.P No. 102420 of 2024 No.1-State. Inspite of service of notice, respondent No.2 remained absent and unrepresented. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner would contend that the petitioner was working as a Sub-Registrar (Hubballi North) and he has registered the marriage of one-Anusha (the sister of respondent No.2) with Shrishail S/o Ambaresh Aldal on 19.06.2024. He further submits that the said registration of the marriage is based on the application filled by the parties to the marriage online and documents produced by them. He submits that the marriage has been solemnized on 13.04.2024 as per printed wedding invitation card and the petitioner has registered the said marriage based on the documents submitted before him on 19.06.2024. 5. He further submits that petitioner being a Sub-Registrar has no authority to question the authenticity of the documents produced before him. The petitioner is not a party to the marriage taken place on 13.04.2024 and therefore, offence under Section 11 of the Act is not - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6734 CRL.P No. 102420 of 2024 attracted. Learned counsel for petitioner has placed reliance on the decision of co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Bhimashankar V/s State and Another in Criminal Petition No.200822/2022 decided on 09.11.2023, on the point that the Sub-Registrar has no authority to verify the veracity of title and genuineness of the documents presented before him at the time of registration. With this, he prayed for allowing the petition. 6. Learned Additional Government Advocate would contend that it is the duty of the Sub-Registrar to ascertain the age of the parties to the marriage and the petitioner has failed to do so. With this, he prayed for dismissal of the petition. 7. Having heard learned counsels, the Court has perused FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record. 8. The marriage of one Shrishail and Anusha has been registered on 19.06.2024 by the petitioner. As per the marriage certificate, the marriage of the said Anusha - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6734 CRL.P No. 102420 of 2024 and Shrishail has been solemnized on 13.04.2024. Along with the application filled by the parties, the parties to the marriage and witnesses have given declaration that a valid marriage was solemnized and it is capable of being registered under Section 8 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and particulars given in application are true to their best knowledge and belief. The printed marriage invitation card indicates that the marriage of Shrishail and Anusha has been solemnized on 13.04.2024 and the same has also been stated in the application filled by the said Shrishail and Anusha. The marriage has been registered on 19.06.2024. The petitioner was not party to the solemnization of the marriage of Anusha and Shrishail. The petitioner has not promoted the marriage or permitted it to be solemnized or failed to prevent it from being solemnized. Therefore, the ingredients of Section 11 of the Act has not attracted sofaras, petitioner-Sub-Registrar is concerned. In view of the decision in the case of Bhimashankar (supra), the Sub-Registrar has no authority to verify the veracity of the title and genuineness - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6734 CRL.P No. 102420 of 2024 of the documents presented before him. Considering the above aspects, the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.1 is abuse of process of law. 9. In the result, the following: ORDER i. The petition is allowed. ii. The FIR and complaint in Vidyanagar P.S Crime No.79/2024 is quashed sofaras petitioner/accused No.1 is concerned. SD/- (SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE RKM CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 56