Karnataka High Court
Mallikarjun Fakeerappa Potanavar vs The State Of Karnataka on 27 January, 2025
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:1523
CRL.P No. 103799 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103799 OF 2024 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
1. MALLIKARJUN FAKEERAPPA POTANAVAR,
AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER,
2. FAKEERAPPA YAMANAPPA POTANAVAR,
AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
3. SMT. GOURAVVA FAKEERAPPA POTANAVAR,
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
PETITIONER NO.1 TO 3 ARE R/O: HOSUR,
TQ: SAVADATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI-580 020.
4. LAXMI RAMAPPA SIDDANNAVAR,
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE,
PETITIONER NO.4 IS R/O: MUTAWAD,
TQ: SAVADATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI-580 020.
... PETITIONERS
Digitally signed by B
K (BY SRI. R.H. ANGADI, ADVOCATE)
MAHENDRAKUMAR
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH AND:
Date: 2025.01.28
15:16:00 +0530
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
(MURGOD POLICE STATION),
R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580 011.
2. SMT. KHATUNABI MUGITASAB NADAF,
AGE: 42 YEARS,
OCC: ANGANWADI SUPERVISOR,
R/O: ANGANWADI SUPERVISOR,
PLOT NO.29,
VEERARAANI KITTUR CHANNAMMA
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:1523
CRL.P No. 103799 of 2024
HOUSING SOCIETY, SRINAGAR,
BELAGAVI-590 001.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP FOR R1)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (528
OF BNSS), PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE CRIMINAL
PROCEEDINGS IN MURGOD P.S. CRIME NO.139/2022, FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 9, 10, 11 OF PROHIBITION OF CHILD
MARRIAGE ACT 2006, U/S 376(2)(N), 34 OF IPC AND SECTION 4, 6
OF POCSO ACT 2012, PENDING IN SPL.C.NO.162/2022 PENDING
ON THE FILE OF ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-1,
(POCSO) BELAGAVI, SO FAR AS PETITIONERS WHO ARE
ARRAYED AS ACCUSED NO.1 TO 3 AND 5, TO MEET THE ENDS OF
JUSTICE.
THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
ORAL ORDER
The petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 4 are sought to be
prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 9,10,11 of
the Prohibition of Child Marriage (Karnataka Amendment ) Act,
2016, and under Section 376(2)(n), 34 of IPC and Sections 4, 6 of
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
2. The case of the prosecution is that, when the survivor
went to the hospital for the delivery of her first child, it was noticed
that the survivor was minor and her marriage was solemnized in
violation of Child Marriage Act, 2006, and therefore, the accused
No.1 has committed the offence punishable under Section
376(2)(n), and Section 4 and 6 of Protection of Children from
NC: 2025:KHC-D:1523
Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and other accused have abetted the
commission of the aforesaid offences.
3. The petitioners- accused, the survivor and her mother
are present before this court and they have filed an application for
compounding of the offences stating that from the wedlock of
accused No.1 and the survivor two children are born and the
survivor and the children are solely dependent on accused No.1 for
their livelihood. The survivor who is accompanied by her mother
has stated that she has no objection for quashing the impugned
proceedings against the petitioners-accused herein.
4. The application is placed on record.
5. Learned High Court Government Pleader submits that
the accused has committed forcible penetrative sexual assault on
the minor girl. Therefore, the offences alleged against the accused
are heinous and crime against the society and the same cannot be
compounded.
6. In identical circumstances, the High Court of
Rajasthan, in the case of Tarun Vaishnav -vs- State of
Rajasthan, at paras 18 and 19 has held as follows:
"18. This Court feels that it is a fit case to exercise its inherent powers
under Section 482 of the Code for quashing the FIR to secure the
ends of justice, because:-
(i) an adolescent girl of tender age (16 years) has fallen in love
with a boy of 22 years;
NC: 2025:KHC-D:1523
(ii) both being immature, apparently driven by momentary
emotions have fallen prey to lust, surpassing social, moral and
legal limits;
(iii) the complainant is the police and the girl or her family are
neither aggrieved party nor complainant;
(iv) the girl has been consistent in her stand that she consented
to the physical relationship. Not only in her statements under
Section 161 and Section 164 of the Code but also before this
Court, the girl unequivocally accepted that she had consented
to the act;
(v) their fornication though may be without legal and moral
sanction, has resulted in child birth;
(vi) parents of both - the girl and the boy having forgiven their
respective children for their felony, intend to tie them in nuptial
knot, when the prosecutrix attains marriageable age;
(vii) if the prosecution continues, the petitioner is sure to face
conviction, as the girl is minor. The conviction will result in 10
years of incarceration which would bring more agony and
misery to the girl and her newly born son, rather than securing
justice;
(viii) and also because, the basic ingredients of retributive
theory of punishment -"avenge for the person wronged" is
completely absent.
19. Faced with such situation and upon appraisal of the overall
circumstances, as an exceptional case, this Court is persuaded to
allow the petition, as prayed. The impugned FIR No.0260/2022
registered at Police Station Devnagar, Jodhpur City (West) against the
petitioner, is hereby, quashed not only on the basis of compromise, but
NC: 2025:KHC-D:1523
also for the reasons mentioned hereinabove and what has transpired
during the course of hearing."
7. The judgment of the High Court of Rajasthan was
taken up in an appeal, and the Hon'ble Supreme Court has
confirmed the decision of the High Court of Rajasthan in SLP (Crl.)
No. 1890/2023 dated 3.3.2023.
8. Though the survivor was the minor as on the date of
incident, however, having regard to the fact that, the survivor has
stated that she married the petitioner-accused No.1 on her own
volition without there being any undue influence and coercion, and
if the petitioner-accused is subjected to trial, it would result in
incarceration of the petitioner-accused resulting in causing misery
and agony to the survivor rather than securing the ends of justice.
Therefore, the continuation of the criminal proceedings will be an
abuse of the process of law.
9. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
i) The Criminal petition is allowed
ii) The impugned proceedings in Spl.C.No.162/2022 on
the file, II Additional District and Sessions Court, FTSC-I (POCSO),
Belagavi is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
(HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR)
JUDGE
HR
Ct:vh
