Sri N C Harish Kumar @ Harish vs The State Of Karnataka
2023 Latest Caselaw 2311 Kant

                                                 -1-
                                                         CRL.P No. 11437 of 2022




                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                                DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF APRIL, 2023

                                               BEFORE
                                THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
                                CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11437 OF 2022
                       BETWEEN:

                       SRI. N C HARISH KUMAR @ HARISH,
                       S/O NARASIMHAMURHTY,
                       AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
                       RESIDING AT NO.300,
                       NEW BYROHALLI,
                       SULIKERE POST, KENGERI HOBLI,
                       BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK,
                       BANGALORE - 560 060.

                                                                   ...PETITIONER
                       (BY SRI. D A SHIVAKUMAR, ADVOCATE)

                       AND:

Digitally signed by    1.    THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
LAKSHMINARAYAN
N                            BY KENGERI POLICE,
Location: High Court
of Karnataka                 REPRESENTED BY HIGH COURT
                             PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
                             BANGALORE - 560 001.

                       2.    SRI. NAGARAJU,
                             S/O LATE HONNAIAH,
                             AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
                             RESIDING AT NO. 6,
                             KALAIAHNA PALYA,
                             TAVAREKERE HOBLI,
                             CHUNCHANAKUPPE POST,
                             -2-
                                   CRL.P No. 11437 of 2022




   BENGALURU - 562 130.
                                            ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B J ROHITH, HCGP FOR R1;
    SRI. K G CHANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 (ABSENT)

     THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO
ALLOW   THIS   CRIMINAL    PETITION   BY   QUASHING     THE
CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE LEARNED LIV
ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (FTSC-1) AT
BENGALURU IN SPL.C.C.NO.372/2017 FOR THE OFFENCES
P/U/S.366, 366-A, 343, 354, 506 R/W SEC.34 OF IPC 1860
ALONG WITH SEC.17 OF POCSO ACT 2012 REGISTERED BY
THE KENGERI POLICE AT ANNEXURE A.

     THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                          ORDER

Respondent No. 2 was represented by counsel, but

both remained absent.

This petition is filed by petitioner/accused No.1 under

Section 482 of the Cr.P.C for quashing the criminal

proceedings in Spl.C.C.372/2017 arising out of crime

No.132/2017 registered by the Kengeri police and charge-

sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 366,

CRL.P No. 11437 of 2022

366(A), 343, 354, 506 read with Section 34 of I.P.C and

Section 17 of POCSO Act, 2012.

2. During the pendency of the petition, both petitioner

and victim girl appeared through their counsel and filed a

joint compromise application along with affidavits under

Section 320 read with Section 482 of I.P.C for seeking

permission to compound the offence.

3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner and

victim girl said to have had love affairs between them, and

the parents were not interested in marrying the victim to

the petitioner, therefore they lodged the complaint as the

petitioner said to have abducted the victim girl from the

custody of respondent No.2.

4. The case was charge-sheeted by the police, and now

the case is pending before the Sessions Judge, where the

complainant was already examined as a witness and the

victim girl was also examined as P.W.2, but she was

turned hostile and has not supported the prosecution case.

CRL.P No. 11437 of 2022

She has not stated that the petitioner abducted her, but

she has stated that the police called her to the police

station, her parents were also there, some police assaulted

her, and they obtained signatures on blank papers and

sent her back to the remand home.

5. Learned High Court Government Pleader objected to

allowing the application.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on

the judgment of this Court in Crl.P.6214/2022, where the

Co-ordinate Bench allowed the application and permitted

compounding the offence. The petitioner's counsel submits

that the petitioner and respondent No.2 already married

about three years back now the victim's age is 24 years

and the accused's age is 26 years. The marriage certificate

was also produced, which shows that on 20.10.2020,

marriage has been certified by the Registrar of Marriage.

The victim is said to have eloped with the petitioner due to

their love affairs, as both of them were studying at the

same college. The parents have no interest in proposal of

CRL.P No. 11437 of 2022

their marriage therefore, it seems they have filed a

complaint, and the police said to be assaulted the victim in

the presence of her parents. Of course, this offence is non-

bailable. The Court cannot convict the accused, and

conducting the trial knowing that the victim has not

supported the case will not give any fruitful result to the

prosecution. It is only an futile exercise in conducting a

trial and finally going to acquit the accused by the Trial

Court. Such being the case, I am of the considered view

that when the petitioner and victim are already married

and living together as husband and wife, and in the

interest of the victims life and their marriage life, this

Court also feels deem fit and proper to allow the

application. According, I.A.No.1/2023 is allowed. Parties

are permitted to compound the offences.

Consequently, criminal petition is allowed. The

criminal proceedings against petitioner No.1 in

Spl.C.C.No.372/2017 pending on the file of LIV Additional

City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City arising out of

CRL.P No. 11437 of 2022

arising out of crime No.132/2017 registered by the

Kengeri police is hereby quashed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

HDK CT: BHK