Saddam Hussain Alias Saddam Limbuwale vs State Of Karnataka
2025 Latest Caselaw 7919 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Saddam Hussain Alias Saddam Limbuwale vs State Of Karnataka on 2 September, 2025

Author: S.Vishwajith Shetty

Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty

                                                   -1-
                                                             NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238
                                                         CRL.P No. 102892 of 2025


                    HC-KAR



                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD
                              DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
                                               BEFORE
                             THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
                                CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102892 OF 2025
                                        (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)
                    BETWEEN:
                    SADDAM HUSSAIN ALIAS SADDAM LIMBUWALE
                    S/O. MOHAMMED FAROOQ LIMBUWALE
                    AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: MECHANIC,
                    R/O. NEAR VAISHNO DEVI TEMPLE,
                    ISHWAR NAGAR, APMC, HUBBALLI-580025.
                                                                       ...PETITIONER
                    (BY SRI R.M.JAVED, ADVOCATE)

                    AND:
                    1.   STATE OF KARNATAKA
                         THROUGH APMC NAVNAGAR P.S.,
                         REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
                         HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                         BENCH AT DHARWAD-580001.

                    2.   SMT. SANNA KARIYAVVA W/O. UMESH VALIKAR,
                         AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
        Digitally
        signed by
        RAKESH S
                         R/O. TALWAR ONI, AMARGOL, HUBBALLI-580025.
RAKESH HARIHAR                                                     ...RESPONDENTS
S       Location:
        HIGH
HARIHAR COURT OF
        KARNATAKA
                    (BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R-1,
        DHARWAD
        BENCH       SRI ANWAR BASAH B., ADVOCATE FOR-2)

                         THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (528 OF
                    BNSS), SEEKING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS INSTITUTED
                    AGAINST HIM IN CONNECTION WITH APMC NAVANAGAR P.S. CRIME
                    NO.42/2024 NOW IN SPL.SC NO.45/2024 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE
                    PUNISHABLE U/S 376, 504, 506 OF IPC AND SECTION 6 OF POCSO
                    ACT AND SECTION 3(2)(V), 3(1)(r)(s) OF SC/ST (PREVENTION OF
                    ATROCITIES) ACT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL
                    DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPL.JUDGE, DHARWAD.

                        THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
                    COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                              -2-
                                         NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238
                                   CRL.P No. 102892 of 2025


HC-KAR



                         ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)

Petitioner is before this Court with a prayer to quash

the entire proceedings in Special S.C. No.45 of 2024

pending before the Court of II Additional District and

Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Dharwad arising out of

Crime No.42 of 2024 registered by APMC Navanagar Police

Station, Hubballi for offences punishable under Sections

376, 504, 506 of IPC, Section 6 of POCSO Act and Sections

3(2)(v), 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled

Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

counsel for respondent No.2 jointly submit that dispute

between the parties has been amicably settled at the

intervention of elders and well wishers of both the parties.

The parents and elders of both the parties have decided to

perform the marriage of the petitioner with the victim girl,

NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238

HC-KAR

who is now a major. They submit that petitioner is now

aged 20 years 4 months and immediately after he attains

the age of 21 years, the marriage of the petitioner and the

victim will be performed and registered before the

Jurisdictional Registrar of Marriages. They submit that

parties are before this Court seeking permission of this

Court to compound the offences and in support of their

prayer, the petitioner and his father have filed their

respective affidavits before this Court. They also submit

that father of the victim girl has also filed his affidavit

admitting the settlement between the parties. They submit

that the settlement between the parties is voluntary without

there being any undue influence and coercion and pendency

of this case has been causing untold hardship to them and

their relatives and they are not in a position to live a normal

life. Accordingly, they pray to allow the petition.

NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238

HC-KAR

4. Learned HCGP, however, has brought to the

notice of this Court that charge sheet has been filed in the

present case for non-compoundable offences.

5. The affidavits filed by the petitioner, his father

and by the father of the victim are taken on record. In

paragraph Nos.2 to 5 of the affidavit filed by the petitioner,

it is stated as follows:

"2. I state that I have filed the above petition seeking quashing of entire proceedings in connection with APMC Navanagar P.S. Crime No.42/2024 (Now Spl. S.C. No.45/2024) pending on the file of II Addl. Dist and Sessions Judge and Spl. Judge, Dharwad for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 376, 504, 506 of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act and Sections 3(2)(v), 3(1)(r)(s) of SC / ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, since I and the victim girl are getting married and have amicably resolved the issue.

3. I state that I and the victim girl are in relationship and we both have decided to go for marriage and for this my parents and parents of victim girl has consented to it.

NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238

HC-KAR

4. I state that sine I am 20 years 4 months old and to get marriage register I should have completed 21 years of age, therefore for the registration of marriage we need to wait another 8 months. I state that as soon I complete the age of 21 years I undertake that, at earliest, in the presence of parents we will get out marriage registered.

5. I sate that, without fail, as soon as I complete the marriageable (21 years) age will get marriage register before the concerned authority. If I fail so, the respondent No.2 and victim girl may initiate proceedings against me according to law."

6. In the affidavit of the father of the petitioner, the

statements made by his son have been reiterated. The

father of the victim girl has filed a separate affidavit which

is also taken on record. In paragraph Nos.2 to 5 of the

affidavit filed by the father of the victim girl, it is stated as

follows:

"2. I state that my wife (respondent No.2) is not keeping well and hence I am present before the court today and submitting this affidavit. The same may be considered and taken on record.

NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238

HC-KAR

3. I state that the victim girl is our daughter and now she is 19 years old. I know the petitioner / accused.

4. I state that my daughter (victim girl) knows the petitioner / accused Saddam Limbuwale since few years and they both like each other and both have decided to go for marriage. I and my wife have consented for the same and the parents of petitioner / accused have also agreed for the same.

5. I state that since the accused and victim girl (my daughter) are in relationship and like each other, hence we have decided not to further process the matter and decided to bring to its logical end."

7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian

Singh vs. State of Punjab reported in (2012) 10 SCC

303 has held that power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is

required to be exercised to secure the ends of justice and to

prevent abuse of process of Court and these powers can be

exercised to quash the legal proceedings or complaint or

FIR in appropriate cases where the parties have settled

their dispute and for that purpose any definite category of

offence cannot be prescribed. In the case of Parbatbhai

NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238

HC-KAR

Aahir vs. State of Gujarat reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641

the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that the powers

under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. are not restricted by the

provisions outlined under Section 320 of Cr.P.C., which

means, the High Court can exercise its inherent powers

independently notwithstanding the limitations under Section

320 of Cr.P.C. A coordinate bench of this Court in almost

identical circumstances in the case of Mohammad

Waseem Ahamad vs. State reported in AIR Online 2022

KAR 314, in view of the settlement arrived between the

parties after the accused and the victim got married and the

victim had given birth to a child, has quashed the entire

proceedings in the criminal case which was pending before

the Special Court for similar offences. In the case of

Aarush Jain vs. State of Karnataka and another (Crl.P.

No.3710/2022 DD 09.09.2022) a coordinate bench of

this Court has observed as follows:

"xxxxxxxxxxx It is an admitted fact that the petitioner and the victim were close friends

NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238

HC-KAR

and were infatuated to each other. Several Courts as quoted hereinabove have considered the impact of hauling an under aged boy into the web of the provisions under the POCSO Act has clearly held that POCSO Act was not meant to punish the accused who were in love with the victims therein.

14. It is a known fact which bear consideration in the aforequoted judgments, in physiological parlance, that adolescence of a child is between 10 to 19 years and young age is said to be between 20 to 24 years. Therefore, adolescence is a continuum of development process in the life of a child metamorphosing into young age or an adult. It would not be inapt to notice that young children or boys who have not yet reached the age of 18 years, many a time, without realizing or being ignorant of the consequences of their act which they perform in the frenzy of youth, emerge themselves as offenders under the provisions of POCSO Act and face serious consequences. Romantic love between a boy and a girl of the age of adolescence sometimes arising out of infatuations result in the boy embroiling himself

NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238

HC-KAR

into the vortex of the provisions of the POCSO Act.

15. The laudable object for which the POCSO Act was brought into effect cannot be forgotten, but that would not mean that it is meant to punish young children who would fall in love and commit such acts which would become punishable under the Act, a caveat, this Court is not painting every incidence of sexual activity of any kind that would become an offence under the POCSO Act, with the same brush, but there are cases of the kind, like the one at hand, where the adolescents have indulged in such acts due to lack of knowledge of consequence of law. xxxxxxxxxxxx".

8. No doubt Section 376 of IPC and Sections 4 and

6 of the POCSO Act are non-compoundable under Section

320 of Cr.P.C., however, considering the observation made

by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh and

Parbatbhai, that the powers of the High Court under Section

482 of Cr.P.C. are not restricted by the provisions of Section

320 of Cr.P.C. and the inherent powers under Section 482

- 10 -

NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238

HC-KAR

of Cr.P.C. can be exercised to quash the FIR or criminal

proceedings if this Court is of the considered opinion that

continuation of the criminal case is not in the interest of the

parties and on the other hand ends of justice would be

secured if the criminal proceedings is quashed,

notwithstanding the fact that alleged offences are non

compoundable, still this Court in deserving cases can quash

the entire proceedings.

9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of

Ramgopal and Another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

reported in AIR 2022 (14) SCC 531 has held that even in

cases involving non compoundable offences where

compromise is voluntary and allegations are private in

nature, extra ordinary powers of the High Court can be

exercised beyond the metes and bounds of Section 320 of

Cr.P.C."

10. The High Court while exercising its powers under

Section 482 of Cr.P.C., in a case involving non-

- 11 -

NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238

HC-KAR

compoundable offence, is required to take into

consideration the gravity of offences and also the nature of

offences. In addition to the same, the High Court is also

required to take the nature of settlement between the

parties.

11. In the present case, allegation against the

petitioner is private in nature and material on record would

go to show that petitioner and victim girl are in love. The

dispute between the parties has been now amicably settled

and the elders and family members of both the parties have

decided to perform the marriage of the petitioner with the

victim girl, who is now a major. This Court is required to

exercise its discretion taking into consideration the facts

and circumstances of the case surrounding the incident and

also the background in which the settlement has been

arrived between the parties. Considering the nature of

allegations found against the petitioner and also the

background in which the dispute has been settled between

- 12 -

NC: 2025:KHC-D:11238

HC-KAR

the parties, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case wherein

this Court is required to exercise its inherent powers so as

to secure the ends of justice to all the parties. Accordingly,

the following:

ORDER

Criminal Petition is allowed.

The entire proceedings in Special S.C. No.45 of 2024

pending before the Court of II Additional District and

Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Dharwad arising out of

Crime No.42 of 2024 registered by APMC Navanagar Police

Station, Hubballi for offences punishable under Sections

376, 504, 506 of IPC, Section 6 of POCSO Act and Sections

3(2)(b), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the

petitioner is quashed.

Sd/-

(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

RSH CT:GSM