- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31654 WP No. 2763 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 2763 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. SHASHI KUMAR S/O GOPALA @ GOPALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT No.35, BYLAKONENAHALLI VILLAGE, DASANPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, PIN CODE – 560 073. AND ALSO RESIDING AT MURALIKUPPE VILLAGE, SEEGEHALLI POST, MAYASANDRA HOBLI, TURUVEKERE TALUK, CHANDRASHEKAPURA, TUMAKURU DISTSRICT, PIN CODE – 572 213. 2. SRI. GOPALA @ GOPALAPPA S/O LATE THIMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/AT MURALIKUPPE VILLAGE, SEEGEHALLI POST, MAYASANDRA HOBLI, TURUVEKERE TALUK, CHANDRASHEKARPURA, TUMKUR DISTRICT – 572 213. 3. SMT. JAYAMMA AGED ABOURT 55 YEARS, R/AT MURALIKUPPE VILLAGE, SEEGEHALLI POST, MAYASANDRA HOBLI, TURUVEKERE TALUK, Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31654 WP No. 2763 of 2025 CHANDRASHEKAPURA, TUMKUR DISTSRICT – 572 213. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PUNITH C., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY MADANAYAKANALLI POLICE STATION, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, PIN CODE – 562162. REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALROE 560001. 2. SMT. ANITHALAKSHMI AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, DISTRICT CHILD PROTECTION UNIT, BANGALOERE RURAL DISTRICT, PIN CODE – 560 064. MOBILE 9611353830 3. XXXXX (VICTIM) XXXXXX …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. DEEPTHI ALVA, HCGP FOR R1 & R2; SRI. YADUNANDAN N., ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 528 OF THE BNSS 2023 PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED CRIMINAL PROSECUTION IN CRIME NO.22/2025 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 376 OF IPC, SECTION 4 AND 6 OF THE POCSO ACT AND SECTION 9, 10 AND 11 OF THE PROHIBITIONS OF THE CHILD MARRIAGE ACT REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 - POLICE AGAINST THE PETITIONERS AS PER ANNEXURE-A FIR IN CRIME NO.22/2025 AND ANNEXURE-B WRITTEN COMPLY DATED 08.01.2025 ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC- II, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31654 WP No. 2763 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioners – accused Nos.1, 4 and 6 are before this Court seeking registration of a crime in Crime No.22/2025, pending before the Additional District And Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court – 2, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Section 376 of the IPC, Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Sections 9, 10 and 11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006. 2. On the allegations that respondent No.3, a minor girl, aged 17 years at the relevant point in time, was given to petitioner No.1 in the marriage solemnized on 01.05.2024, by her parents and was made pregnant before attaining majority, a complaint comes to be registered against petitioner No.1, the husband of respondent No.3, and the parents of the couple for the afore-quoted offences. Therefore, the subject petition is filed seeking quashment of the proceedings, on the score that, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31654 WP No. 2763 of 2025 if proceedings are continued, it would prejudice their married life. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners and respondent No.3, in unison would submit that the couple are living happily and the allegations are not factual. They submit that the parties are before this Court seeking quashment of the proceedings on the score that the marriage is performed when the victim attained majority and the same is registered on 16.09.2025. They file an application under Section 359 r/w. 528 of the BNSS along with a joint affidavit, photocopies of the marriage certificate and aadhar cards of the parties, seeking permission to compound the alleged offences and pray that the impugned crime be quashed. Be those submissions as they are. 4. The issue now would be, whether on account of marriage, the proceedings against the petitioners - accused could be quashed or otherwise. This issue need not detain this Court for long or delve deep into the matter. The Apex Court - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31654 WP No. 2763 of 2025 in the case of MAHESH MUKUND PATEL v. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS 1 has held as follows: "5. On the last date, we had directed learned counsel appearing for the State to get the marriage certificate relied upon by the parties duly verified. Accordingly, an affidavit has been filed by Dr. Atul Tripathi, ACP, Sarnath in which it is stated that the marriage certificate has been verified and it is found to be genuine and in fact a true copy thereof has been produced along with the affidavit. 6. Our attention is invited to the affidavit filed by the third respondent in which she has accepted the fact that she is happily married to the appellant and they have been residing together. She has disclosed her date of birth as 20th July, 1998. In the record of the Primary School, as can be seen from document at Annexure ‘P-1’, the date of birth of the third respondent is shown as 20th July, 1998. Ossification test was conducted during the investigation. The report of the test is that on the date of commission of the offence, the age of the third respondent may be between 17½ years to 19 years. There are documents on record to show that the date of birth of the third respondent was 20th July, 1998. Therefore, when the offence was allegedly committed in September, 2016 she was already a major. 7. Now that the appellant and third respondent are happily married, no purpose will be served by continuing the prosecution as it will cause undue harassment to the appellant, the third respondent and their children. 8. Coming to the impugned order, we find that the marriage certificate was placed on record before the High Court. In fact, no objection by the first informant is also recorded in the impugned order. Surprisingly, the High Court instead of entertaining the petition for quashing on the ground of settlement, has observed that the application for dropping criminal proceedings on the basis compromise may be 1 [2025 SCC Online SC 614] - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31654 WP No. 2763 of 2025 moved before the Trial Court. The High Court completely lost sight of the fact that the Trial Court could not have recorded the settlement and in fact, this was a fit case for the High Court to have exercised its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. by quashing the proceedings. Unnecessarily, the parties have been forced to come to this Court. 9. The impugned order is set aside. FIR No. 567 of 2016 registered with Cholapur Police Station, District Varanasi and proceedings of the Sessions Trial No. 1332 of 2021 pending before the Special Judge, POCSO Act, Varanasi are hereby quashed." (Emphasis supplied) 5. The interlocutory application reads as follows: “1. That the Petitioners have been arraigned as Accused No.1,5 and 6 in Crime No:22/2025 for the offence punishable under section 376 of IPC, 4 and 6 of POCSO and 9,10 and 11 of Child Marriage act at the instance of a written complaint came to be registered at the instance of Respondent No.2, who claims to be an social worker. 2. That the marriage of the Respondent No.3 with the 1st Petitioner was an love cum arrange marriage on 14.09.2025 and after the marriage, the 1st Petitioner and Respondent No.3 continued their marital life with all love and affection towards each other. That out of the wedlock, the 1st Petitioner and 3rd Respondent have 1 year 4-month baby and they are leading matrimonial life without any dispute. 3. The physical Intimacy of the 1st Respondent and 3rd Respondent Is with consent with each other and there is no force by either of the parties. The said act was a consensual one. 4. That, Respondent No.2 has given a false complaint that the 3rd Respondent was married to the 1st Petitioner on 01.05.2024 and thereby alleged that the Petitioners have said to be committed an offence is absolutely false. That the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31654 WP No. 2763 of 2025 marriage was not held on 01.05.2024 between the 1st Petitioner and 3rd Respondent. 5. That there are no disputes between the 1st Petitioner and 3rd Respondent and they are happily leading their life and this Criminal Prosecution initiated by the third parties are causing disturbances in our life and the Petitioner No.2 and 3 have no role to play as alleged by the Respondent No.2. Infact, the Petitioner No.2 and 3 are taking good care of the 3rd Respondent and the minor child. 6. That both the Petitioners and the Respondent No. 3 jointly request this Hon'ble Court to quash the above criminal proceedings, as the alleged offence itself has not occurred. The allegations of the Respondent No.2 are based on the assumption and presumption. 7. That if this application is not allowed, the Petitioner and the Victim girl will be put to untold hardship, injustice, misery and loss and on the other hand no much hardship will be caused to the other side. WHEREFORE, the Petitioners and Respondent No. 3 prays this Hon'ble Court to quash the above proceedings in view of the amicable settlement arrived between, by allowing the application, in the interest of justice and equity.” In the light of the peculiar facts of the case and that the marriage of the accused with the victim is solemnized on 14.09.2025 and are living together happily, I deem it appropriate to obliterate the proceedings against the petitioners.” In the light of the judgment of the Apex Court and the marriage of the accused with the victim after the incident has solemnized on 14.09.2025, I deem it appropriate to obliterate the proceedings with a rider that in the event, petitioner No.1 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31654 WP No. 2763 of 2025 would leave the lady – victim in lurch, the investigation / proceedings in Crime No.22/2025 would get revived. 6. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is disposed. (ii) The impugned crime in Crime No.22/2025, pending before the Additional District And Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court – 2, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, qua the petitioners, stands quashed. (iii) In the event petitioner No.1 – husband would leave the victim in the lurch later, the impugned crime would spring back by its revival. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE NVJ List No.: 3 Sl No.: 12