- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37861 CRL.P No. 11209 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11209 OF 2025 BETWEEN: RAKESH N S/O NARASIMHA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/AT F- 3, BLACK - 5, NEAR HIGHWAY CIRCLE, NELSAN MANDELA ROAD, BANNIMANTAPA, MYSURU CITY - 570 015. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NAGENDRA B, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BAGEPALLI POLICE STATION, REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. SUMITHRA G B W/O NAGARAJU, AGE ABOUT 44 YEARS, CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME OFFICE, BALABANAN, BANNIMANTAPA MYSURU CITY - 570 015. 3. PRAKRUTHI W/O RAKESH N AGE ABOUT 20 YEARS, R/AT F- 3, BLACK - 5, NEAR HIGHWAY CIRCLE, NELSAN MANDELA ROAD, Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37861 CRL.P No. 11209 of 2025 BANNIMANTAPA, MYSURU CITY - 570 015. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAHUL RAI K, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C (U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS ON THE BASIS OF COMPROMISE IN SPL.C.NO.337/2023 ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.57/2023 BY THE NARASIMHARAJA POLICE, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 376(2)(n) OF IPC, U/S 5(J)(II), 5(L), 6 OF POCSO ACT, U/S 9, 11 OF PROHIBITION OF CHILD MARRIAGE ACT, ON THE FILE OF ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT MYSURU (FTSC-1) AGAINST THE PRESENT PETITIONER. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The petitioners, through legal aid, have instituted the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking quashing of the proceedings pending before the trial court. The grounds urged are twofold: firstly, that petitioner No.1 has since solemnized marriage with respondent No.3, and they are now blessed with a child, thereby paving the way for compromise; secondly, that the victim has not supported the prosecution case, and therefore continuation of proceedings would be an empty formality. 2. However, the learned High Court Government Pleader, by drawing attention to the case records, submits that - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37861 CRL.P No. 11209 of 2025 the trial has already reached its final stage, inasmuch as the evidence of the prosecution has been substantially completed, the victim has been examined and has not supported the prosecution case, and the matter now stands posted for final arguments. In this backdrop, it is argued that the petition is not maintainable at this belated stage. 3. This Court finds merit in the said submission. It is now a well-settled principle of law that once the trial has commenced and particularly when it has reached the stage of conclusion, invocation of the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to interdict such proceedings is neither desirable nor permissible, save in exceptional cases. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in numerous judgement. must be exercised sparingly and with circumspection, and not in a manner that would stifle a legitimate trial. Similarly, The Hon’ble Apex Court underscored that quashing of proceedings at the advanced stage of trial would amount to usurping the jurisdiction of the trial court. 4. In the present case, it is not in dispute that the trial is virtually concluded, and the matter is now listed for - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37861 CRL.P No. 11209 of 2025 arguments. If indeed the victim has turned hostile or has not supported the prosecution case, and if the factum of subsequent marriage between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.3 is pressed into service, the same can very well be brought to the notice of the trial court at the time of arguments. It is for the trial court to appreciate such circumstances and render its findings in accordance with law. 5. In light of the above forgoing reasons and the stage at which the trial presently stands, this Court is of the considered opinion that exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is not warranted. Accordingly, the criminal petition is dismissed with the above observations. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE HDK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10 CT: BHK