Karnataka High Court
Sunil S/O Laxman Lamani vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 September, 2025
Author: S.Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13424
CRL.P No. 103999 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103999 OF 2025
(482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
SUNIL S/O LAXMAN LAMANI,
AGE. 25 YEARS, OCC. PVT. WORK,
R/O. HULIKATTI TANDA,
TQ. KALAGHATAGI,
DIST. DHARWAD.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SHARANU NANDOOR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
(PSI HALIYAL POLICE STATION, HALIYAL),
REP. BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD-580 011.
2. SATTYAVVA W/O. SHIVAPPA MADAR,
Digitally
signed by
RAKESH S
AGE. 43 YEARS, OCC. COOLIE,
RAKESH HARIHAR
S Location:
HIGH
HARIHAR COURT OF
R/O. TABAKADAHONNALLI, TQ. KALAGHATAGI,
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD
BENCH
DIST. DHARWAD, NOW AT SATTUR, NEAR IIT COLLEGE,
DHARWAD, DIST. DHARWAD-581 204.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. ANNESAHEB SHALAGAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF
CR.P.C. (UNDER SECTION 528 OF BNSS, 2023), PRAYING TO ALLOW
THE ABOVE CRIMINAL PETITION BY QUASHING THE ENTIRE
PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE ADDL. DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE FTSC-I, U.K. KARWAR, IN HALIYAL P.S. CRIME
NO.184/2025 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 64
OF BNS AND 6 OF POCSO ACT, IN SO FAR AS THE
PETITIONER/ACCUSED IS CONCERNED.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13424
CRL.P No. 103999 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER
IS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
1. Accused in Crime No.184/2025 registered by
Haliyal Police Station, Haliyal Circle, Uttara Kannada
District, for the offences punishable under Section 64 of
BNS, 2023 and Section 6 of POCSO Act, is before this Court
under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. read with Section 528 of
BNSS, 2023, with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings
in the aforesaid case as against him.
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 well wishers of both the parties. Parents and
elders of the parties have decided that marriage of the
petitioner with the victim girl, who has already attained age
of majority, will be performed immediately after the
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13424
HC-KAR
petitioner is released from custody. As a result of the
relationship between the petitioner and the victim girl, she
was pregnant and her pregnancy has now been terminated
after registration of the FIR. Pendency of this case has been
causing untold hardship to the victim girl and she is not in a
position to lead normal life even with her parents and
relatives. FIR was registered in the present case, after the
victim girl was found to be pregnant when she was taken by
her mother for her medical examination. As on the said day,
the victim was major and the petitioner was ready and
willing to marry her, but on wrong advice, the mother of the
victim girl had approached the Police and as a result, FIR
was registered against the petitioner and he is now in
custody. Having realised the mistake committed, the parties
are now before this Court seeking permission of this Court
to permit them to compound the offences for which FIR has
been registered against the petitioner. Accordingly, they
pray to allow the petition.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13424
HC-KAR
4. Learned HCGP has brought to the notice of this
Court that, FIR has been registered in the present case
against the petitioner for non compoundable offences.
5. The victim girl is present before this Court along
with her parents. They have stated that the settlement
between the parties is voluntary, without there being any
undue inference and coercion. They have also stated that
the petitioner was all along ready and willing to marry the
victim girl and only on wrong advice the first informant had
approached the Police. The parties who are present before
the Court have been identified by their learned advocates.
6. The Order Sheet of the trial Court would reflect
that the victim girl had appeared before the trial Court and
after verification of her age, the trial Court has recorded in
its order sheet that it appears that she is major. As per the
prosecution records, the date of birth of the victim girl is
12.06.2007. Therefore, as on the date of registration of the
FIR, she was a major. In the order sheet of the trial Court,
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13424
HC-KAR
it is observed that victim girl had voluntarily approached the
Court stating that she wants to marry the accused and she
had submitted before the Court that she had left her
parents and was residing in her friends' house.
7. The memorandum of petition filed under Section
320 read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is signed by the
brother of the petitioner and also by the Victim girl and her
mother. The said petition is also signed by the learned
advocates appearing for the parties. The petition is
supported by the affidavit of the petitioner, which was
executed in the presence of the Jailer of District Prison,
Karwar and also the affidavit of the brother of the
petitioner. In addition to the same, the affidavits of the
victim girl and her parents is also filed.
8. In paragraph Nos.2 to 6 of the petition filed by
the parties under Section 320 of Cr.P.C., it is stated as
follows:
"2) It is submitted that the petitioners and the
respondent No.2 have amicably settled the
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13424
HC-KAR
dispute between themselves due to the
intervention of elders and now by virtue of the
aforesaid compromise, the second respondent
is agreed to perform the marriage of her
daughter i.e victim girl with the petitioner
herein immediately after releasing him from
the custody further parties have under take
that they will registered the marriage of the
petitioner with victim girl before concerned
sub-register, soon after registration they will
submit the copy of the said marriage
registration, hence the Hon'ble court be please
to pass suitable order and close the case by
quashing the same.
3) That the petitioner and respondent jointly
submit that continuation of the above
proceedings could not sub serve the ends of
justice and so also prosecution would not be
taken to its logical end as the matter has been
amicably settled between the petitioner and
respondent.
4) That the petitioner is in custody since from
30/07/2025 he has filed his affidavit and so
also the mother petitioner and his brother have
signed this petition and they filed affidavit in
support this settlement
5) That the dispute is arising out of the love
affairs therefore both parties agreed to
solemnized the marriage of victim girl with
petitioner accused after releasing him from the
custody
6) That both parties are admit the contents of the
memorandum of compromise petition as true
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13424
HC-KAR
and correct and have voluntarily signed the
said petition out of their free will and volition
and without any threat, force, coercion, or
undue-influence and in furtherance of the
same, the petitioner and his mother and
brother and respondent No.2 have filed their
affidavits swearing to the contents of this
compromise petition."
9. In paragraph Nos.4 and 5 of the affidavit of the
petitioner, it is stated as follows:
"4) I state that myself and victim girl namely
Nagamma Shivappa Madar have love appears
with each other therefore we both have
intended to enter in to marriage but at the
time of incident she is minor therefore the
respondent No.2 has filed complaint now she
has major and we both have decided to enter
in to marriage, therefore I am filling this
affidavit seeking leave of this Hon'ble court.
5) I state that I have undertake before this
Hon'ble court that the proceedings against me
is quashed and after releasing me from the
custody I am ready to marry the victim girl
Namely Nagamma Shivappa Madar who is the
daughter of respondent No.2 with her consent
and so also I am under take before this Hon'ble
court that after our marriage we will registered
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13424
HC-KAR
the marriage before the concerned Sub-
registrar and copy of the registration of
Marriage certificate will be produced before this
Hon'ble court."
10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GIAN
SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB1 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 AAHIR Vs.
STATE OF GUJARAT2 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
(2012) 10 SCC 303
(2017) 9 SCC 641
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13424
HC-KAR
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. STATE3, 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 ANOTHER4, 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 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
AIR OnLine 2022 KAR 314
Crl.P. No.3710/2022, DD: 09.09.2022
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13424
HC-KAR
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 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".
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13424
HC-KAR
11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
MADHUKAR & ORS. Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
AND ANR.5 in paragraph No.6 has held as follows:
"6. At the outset, we recognise that the offence
under Section 376 IPC is undoubtedly of a
grave and heinous nature. Ordinarily, quashing
of proceedings involving such offences on the
ground of settlement between the parties is
discouraged and should not be permitted
lightly. However, the power of the Court under
Section 482 Cr.P.C. to secure the ends of
justice is not constrained by a rigid formula
and must be exercised with reference to the
facts of each case."
12. 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 cases of GIAN SINGH
and PARBATBHAI (supra), that the powers of the High Court
under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. are not restricted by the
2025 INSC 819
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13424
HC-KAR
provisions of Section 320 of Cr.P.C. and the inherent powers
under Section 482 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.
13. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
RAMGOPAL AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF MADHYA
PRADESH6, 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.
AIR 2022 (14) SCC 531
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13424
HC-KAR
14. The material on record would go to show that the
petitioner and the victim girl were in love and as a result of
their relationship, the victim girl got pregnant. The Doctor
who had medically examined the victim girl when she was
taken to the hospital by her mother for her medical
examination had informed the mother of the victim girl that
the victim girl was pregnant and thereafter, the mother of
the victim girl had approached the Police, which had
resulted in registration of FIR in the present case. The
material on record would go to show that as on the date of
registration of FIR, the victim girl was 18 years and 1
month. The parents of both the parties have now decided to
perform the marriage of the petitioner with the victim girl
and considering the peculiar facts and circumstance of the
case and the background in which the FIR came to be
registered against the petitioner, who is in now in custody, I
am of the considered opinion that the prayer made by the
parties to this petition needs to be granted in order to do
- 14 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13424
HC-KAR
complete justice to all the parties. Accordingly, the
following:
ORDER
(i) The Criminal Petition is allowed.
(ii) The entire proceedings in Crime
No.184/2025 registered by Haliyal Police
Station, Haliyal Circle, Uttara Kannada
District, for the offences punishable under
Section 64 of BNS, 2023 and Section 6 of
POCSO Act is quashed.
Sd/-
(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
JUDGE
DN & VNP / CT:BCK
