- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010590922025 NC: 2026:KHC:42120 CRL.P No. 12791 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 12791 OF 2025 BETWEEN: KARTHIK @ A KARTHIK, S/O LATE ARUMUGAM, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/OF BISALVADI VILLAGE, BANDIGOWDANAHALLI, CHAMARAJANAGARA, KARNATAKA 571127. …PETITIONER (BY SRI AFROZ PASHA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CHAMRAJANAGARA RURAL POLICE STATION, REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BANGALORE 560001. 2. SHIVALILA K LANGOTI, W/O SUBHASH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, CDPO OFFICE, KOLLEGALA TOWN, KOLLEGALA TALUQ, CHAMARAJANAGAR, KARNATAKA 571440. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI K NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP FOR R-1) Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010590922025 NC: 2026:KHC:42120 CRL.P No. 12791 of 2025 THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 (FILED U/S.528 BNSS) CR.P.C TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN SPL.C.NO.19/2024 (CRIME NO.140/2023) FOR ALLEGED OFFENCES P/US/ 376(2)(n), OF IPC AND SEC.4, 5(J)(ii), 6 OF POCSO ACT 2012 REGISTERED AND CHARGED SHEETED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE I.E., CHAMARAJANAGAR RURAL POLICE STATION PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE FTSC I CHAMARAJANAGAR. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner – accused No.1 is before this Court seeking quashment of the proceedings in Spl.C.No.19/2024, pending before the Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-1, Chamarajanagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n) of the IPC and Sections 4, 5(j)(ii) and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, on the ground that the petitioner and victim have got married and living happily with a baby girl. 2. Heard Sri Afroz Pasha, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri K. Nageshwarappa, learned High Court Government - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010590922025 NC: 2026:KHC:42120 CRL.P No. 12791 of 2025 Pleader for respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 though served, remains unrepresented. 3. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows: Petitioner is the accused, respondent No.2 – Women Supervisor of CDPO, the complainant. A complaint comes to be registered in Crime No.140/2023, on the score that the minor girl became pregnant due to the acts of the petitioner. It is the allegation that when the victim girl was taken to the Primary Health Center, for a routine checkup in connection with her pregnancy and to obtain a Tayi Card, the complainant receives an information from a Health Officer, that the victim girl had earlier got pregnant when she was a minor and the pregnancy ended in a miscarriage. The victim girl also took treatment at private hospital for miscarriage of her pregnancy. Therefore, the complainant registers a crime in Crime No.140/2023. The police after investigation, file their final report before the concerned Court in Spl.C.No.19/2024. 4. It transpires that the victim after attaining the age of majority has married the petitioner - accused on 29.07.2023 - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010590922025 NC: 2026:KHC:42120 CRL.P No. 12791 of 2025 and the same is registered on 23.01.2026. Therefore, the subject petition is filed seeking quashment of the proceedings, on the score that, if proceedings are continued, it would prejudice their married life. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and the victim have since married and are presently living together with their minor daughter. The learned counsel files an application and a joint affidavit of the petitioner and his wife, the victim girl seeking permission to compound the offences and contends that respondent No.2 is unrepresented and therefore, prays to accept the application and the joint affidavit of the couple. 3. The issue now would be, whether on account of marriage, the proceedings against the petitioner - accused could be quashed or otherwise. This issue need not detain this Court for long or delve deep into the matter. The Apex Court in the case of MAHESH MUKUND PATEL v. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS 1 has held as follows: 1 [2025 SCC Online SC 614] - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010590922025 NC: 2026:KHC:42120 CRL.P No. 12791 of 2025 "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 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. - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010590922025 NC: 2026:KHC:42120 CRL.P No. 12791 of 2025 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) The parties to the lis have filed an application under Section 320(2) of the Cr.P.C. before this Court seeking permission to compound the offences supported by the joint affidavit of the petitioner and the victim girl and a copy of the registered marriage certificate, before this Court. 4. The application reads as follows: “3. It is submitted that; on 29/07/2023 petitioner No 1 got married to the Victim girl and they both having baby girl and they are living happily together. 4. It is submitted that, out of the said wedlock a baby girl born to the victim girl and presently all the petitioners and victim are living together and both the victim girl and the baby are under the care and custody of the 1st petitioner. 5. That, the 1st petitioner and victim girl has registered their marriage before the Chamarajanagar Sub Registrar, in Marriage Number CRJ-HM00515-2025-26 Dated 23/01/2026. 6. That the above offences are compoundable with the permission of the court.” - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010590922025 NC: 2026:KHC:42120 CRL.P No. 12791 of 2025 In the light of the judgment of the Apex Court and the fact that the marriage of the accused with the victim has solemnized on 29.07.2023, I deem it appropriate to obliterate the proceedings with a rider that in the event, the petitioner would leave the lady in lurch, the proceedings in Spl.C.No.19/2024 would get revived. 5. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER (i) The criminal petition is disposed. (ii) The proceedings in Spl.C.No.19/2024, pending before the Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-1, Chamarajanagar, qua the petitioner, stand quashed. (iii) In the event the accused would leave the victim in the lurch later, the impugned proceedings would spring back by its revival. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE NVJ List No.: 2 Sl No.: 60