[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Harun vs The State Of Karnataka on 12 March, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2327
CRL.RP No. 200038 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 200038 OF 2026
(397(Cr.PC)/438(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
HARUN S/O GOUSMODDIN ATTAR
AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O SHALIHUSEN NAGAR,
VIJAYAPURA
DIST: VIJAYAPURA-586101
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. KOUJALAGI CHANDRAKANTH LAXMAN., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Digitally signed by
THROUGH VIJAYAPURA
SHIVALEELA WOMEN POLICE STATION
DATTATRAYA UDAGI
DIST: VIJAYAPURA-586101
Location: HIGH
COURT OF R/BY ADDL. SPP
KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH-585107
2. SAJIDABEGUM D/O PEERSAB NADAF
AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT AT BLDE
R/O SHALI HUSSAIN NAGAR
NEAR IBRAHIM ROZA, VIJAYAPURA
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP FOR R1)
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2327
CRL.RP No. 200038 of 2026
HC-KAR
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/SEC. 397 OF CR.P.C (OLD)
U/SEC. 438 OF BNSS (NEW) PRAYING TO A) ADMIT AND CALL
FOR THE RECORDS OF TRIAL COURT; B) SET ASIDE THE
IMPUGNED JUDGMENT DATED 18.02.2026 PASSED BY THE
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT-I
AT VIJAYAPURA IN SPECIAL CASE (PoCSO) NO.133/2025 ON
APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED U/SEC.250
OF BNSS-2023 BEFORE IT AND CONSEQUENTIALLY ALLOW THE
APPLICATION DATED 12.01.2026 FILED BY THE PETITIONER
FOR DISCHARGE IN SPECIAL CASE (PoCSO) NO.133/2025 ON
THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE FAST TRACK
SPECIAL COURT-I AT VIJAYAPURA.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner is assailing the order dated
18.02.2026 passed in Special Case (POCSO) No.133/2025
by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court-I,
Vijayapura, on application filed under Section 250 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and
consequently to allow the application.
2. The brief facts leading to this petition are that,
on the basis of the complaint filed by the complainant, the
Women Police Station, Vijayapura registered the case in
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2327
HC-KAR
Crime No.140/2025 against the accused for the
commission of offence under Section 376(2)(n) and
Sections 5 and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. After investigation,
the investigating officer submitted the charge sheet
against the accused and case was registered in Special
Case (POCSO) No.133/2025. The revision petitioner had
filed application under Section 250 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for discharge of the alleged
offences. The Trial Court has dismissed the application
vide order dated 18.02.2026. Being aggrieved by the
same, the revision petitioner has preferred this petition.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
the learned HCGP for respondent No.1-State.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and
he has not committed any offence as alleged against him.
The entire case, as set out in the complaint, FIR and
charge sheet, is false and cooked up story. The
complainant was fully conscious of the consequences of
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2327
HC-KAR
the intimate relationship which flourished between the
victim and petitioner for a period of almost 9 years (2017
to 2025). The acts of repeated intimacy and sexual
relations were totally consensual in nature and were not
established under any false promise, threat, duress or
coercion. So, it is a case of prolonged voluntary love
affair/relationship between two consenting. Hence, the
case against the petitioner is liable to be discharged.
Further, looking into the entire complaint and charge sheet
materials, police have collected groundless materials on
the basis of said groundless materials, police have
involved the petitioner as accused which is against the
settled principle of law. The alleged incident took place on
03.03.2017. For the first time, the complaint was
registered on 07.10.2025 and there is a delay of about 9
years in lodging the complaint. As such, the same goes to
the root of the matter and creates a doubt about the
genesis or otherwise of the complaint. The complainant
moved closely with petitioner since 2017 to 2025, they
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2327
HC-KAR
were in love with each other and since then they were
happily having physical contact which clearly shows that
she was a consenting party to those acts. Therefore, there
is no forcible sexual assault made by the petitioner.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is a
case of voluntary sexual relationship between two
consenting. Hence, the proceedings of criminal case
registered against the petitioner for the aforesaid offences
tantamount a gross abuse of process of law and therefore
the case against the petitioner deserves to be discharged.
On all these grounds, sought for allowing of this petition.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government
Pleader appearing for respondent No.1-State opposed to
the petition.
6. I have examined the materials placed before
this Court.
7. The Trial Court has observed in paragraph
No.12 to 18 as under;
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2327
HC-KAR
12) Point No.1- At the stage considering this
application, the Court must only evaluate if the
prosecution material creates a grave suspicion
rather than conducting a mini trial, as held in
catena of judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court. The
Court cannot consider documents produced by
the defendants at this stage. With these
principles in mind, the Court proceeds to
consider the application of the accused herein.
13) The victim in her statement before the
doctor has stated that since 2016 they are in
relationship with each other physically and
sexually and since one year the accused has
refused to marry her. Even before the Magistrate
in her statement, she has deposed the very
same facts. She has stated that when she was
16 to 17 years old the accused had taken her to
watch where he has committed forcible sexual
intercourse 3 to 4 times on her.
14) The charge sheet discloses drawing-up of
panchanama of the place where the alleged
sexual intercourse has taken place at the
instance of victim.
15) The statement of the victim is recorded by
the police, which is written by her. The said
statements have to stand trial.
16) Before Magistrate and doctor she states that
incident has occurred during her minority. Prima
facie documents and admission by victim
discloses that she was in love with him. Whether
the said intercourse was during her minority as
alleged by her is a matter of trial.
17) Moreover the acts if done during minority,
the consent of minor would be inconsequential.
Whether the act was on false promise of
marriage and during her minority has be
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2327
HC-KAR
established by full fledged trial. The decision in
Rahul Varma is not applicable at this stage as a
mini trial cannot be held.
18) Prima facie it is seen that the allegation of
the act committed was during minority. As such
the there is sufficient material, in the light of
above guided principle to proceed with the trial.
It is the statement in the witness box that
carries weight. The decision in xxxx vs. State of
NCT the object of POCSO Act has been discussed
and the seriousness of it. As such the act
whether done during the minority has to be by
trial. As such the grounds made out by the
accused are not tenable. Accordingly point No. 1
is answered in the negative."
8. On re-appreciation/reconsideration of the
materials placed before this court, I do not find any legal
or factual error in the impugned order passed by the Trial
Court. Hence, I proceed to pass the following;
ORDER
This Criminal Revision Petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
(G BASAVARAJA)
JUDGE
MSR
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35
