NC: 2026:KHC-K:2502
HC-KAR
10. The said informant, Irfan, is a rival member of
the family who has acted out of sheer malice and
vengeance. He has not even submitted a written complaint
before the respondent police or before the complainant.
Pertinently, it may be noted that the complaint was made
after a gap of more than 2 years.
11. In the original complaint, the complainant did
not utter or allege anything about the petitioner, and the
offences alleged were only regarding an allegation of child
marriage. The FIR was initially registered under Sections
10 and 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2016. It
was later, as an afterthought and with malafide intention
and ulterior motives, that the alleged offences under
Section 64 of the BNS, 2023, and Sections 4, 6, and 17 of
the POCSO Act, 2012, were inserted. There are no specific
allegations against the petitioner; as such, the complaint is
false and fabricated.
12. There is inordinate and inexplicable delay in
lodging the complaint by the complainant. The complaint is
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2502
HC-KAR
concocted and is based on information given by one Irfan
after a gap of more than 2 years from the marriage of the
petitioner and the victim/respondent No. 2, who are
leading a happy married life with two children. It is evident
and crystal clear that false information was given by the
said Irfan to the complainant only to harass the petitioner.
13. The complainant is not the proper official to
lodge a complaint directly, and it is her duty to submit a
report to her higher officials, who shall further investigate
the matter. Furthermore, the complainant also failed to file
an authorization letter to lodge a complaint from her
higher officials.
14. It is pertinent to note that under Muslim law,
the consideration for marriage is puberty, and the normal
age of puberty is treated as 15 years; hence, no offence is
committed by the petitioner under the provisions of the
POCSO Act and the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act,
2006.
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2502
HC-KAR
15. Further, he would submit that the petitioner is
ready to abide by the conditions imposed by this Court as
sought for allow this petition.
16. As against this, the learned HCGP would submit
that the alleged commission of offence is punishable with
imprisonment for 20 years. That there are no grounds to
grant bail, and he sought for dismissal of the petition.
17. I have examined the materials placed before
this Court. In this case, neither the victim nor the parents
of the victim have lodged any complaint with the police.
The grandmother of the victim has filed a memo before
the I Additional Sessions Judge, Raichur, stating that she
has no objection to the grant of bail to the accused, Sri.
Shakeer Pasha, and she sought for grant of bail to him.
18. On the basis of the complaint filed by Smt.
Nagamma, Supervisor working under the CDPO, a
complaint was lodged. On the basis of this complaint, the
Manvi Police Station registered the case in Crime No.
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2502
HC-KAR
307/2024 for the commission of offences under Sections 9
and 10 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage (Karnataka
Amendment) Act, 2016, against accused Nos. 1 to 5.
19. During the course of the investigation, the
Investigating Officer submitted a requisition to the JMFC
Court to insert offences under Section 64 of the BNS,
2023, and Sections 4, 6, and 17 of the POCSO Act, 2012.
The accused is not required for custodial interrogation, as
the Investigating Officer has already arrested the accused
and, since the date of arrest, the accused has been in
judicial custody. It is submitted that the petitioner has two
children, aged about one year and eight months, whom he
needs to look after.
20. Considering the facts and circumstances of this
case and the submissions of the learned counsel for the
petitioner, and without expressing any opinion on the
merits of the case, I am of the opinion that it is just and
proper to allow this petition.
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2502
HC-KAR
21. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
i. The petition is allowed.
ii. Petitioner shall execute a personal bond
for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each with one
surety for the likesum, to the satisfaction
of the trial Court.
iii. The petitioner shall not directly or
indirectly threaten or tamper with the
prosecution witnesses.
iv. The petitioner shall not indulge in similar
offences in future.
v. The petitioner shall assist the
Investigating Office for further
investigation.
Sd/-
(G BASAVARAJA)
JUDGE
TIN
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6
