Allowed

Narayanagowda v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC19 Jan 2024CRL.P/2874/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused sought quashing of POCSO and rape proceedings; parties filed a joint compromise application. With complainant and victim hostile at trial, the court allowed compounding, permitted the offence to be compounded, allowed the petition, and quashed the pending criminal proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; I.A.No.1/2024 for compounding allowed; criminal proceedings against petitioner in Spl.C.No.24/2023 quashed.

Narayanagowda Vs State of Karnataka — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:2727 CRL.P No. 2874 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2874 OF 2023

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

NARAYANAGOWDA S/O RAJANNA, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, R/AT H.T.HALLI VILLAGE, ROLLA MANDAL, MADAKASIRA TALUK, ANANTAPURA, AANDRA PRADESH.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. S.JAGAN BABU, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY PATANAYAKANAHALLI POLICE,

¶12

Digitally signed by VEDAVATHI A K Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶14

PUSHPA W/O HEMARAJA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT KALIGONAHALLI VILLAGE, HULIKUNTE HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU - 560 010.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VENKAT SATYANARAYANA. A., HCGP FOR R1; SRI. H.K.PARAMESH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶16

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:2727 CRL.P No. 2874 of 2023

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN SPL.C.NO.24/2023 ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.101/2022 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 376(2)(n) OF IPC AND SECTION 6 OF POCSO ACT OF PATTANAYAKANAHALLI POLICE STATION, TUMAKURU DISTRICT, NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-1, TUMAKURU.

¶18

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the criminal proceedings in Spl.C.No.24/2023 arising out of Crime No.101/2022 registered by the Pattanayakanahalli Police Station, Tumakuru for the offences punishable under Sections 376 (2)(n) of IPC and section 6 of POCSO Act, pending on the file of Addl. District and Sessions Judge and FTSC-I, Tumakuru.

¶21

During the pendency of the petition, both petitioner and respondent No.2 appeared along their counsel and filed joint compromise application in I.A.No.1/2024 under Section 320 read with Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking permission of this court for compounding the offence.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits, even during the trial the complainant, as well as the victim, both

¶23

¶24

NC: 2024:KHC:2727 CRL.P No. 2874 of 2023

¶25

turned hostile and not supported the prosecution case. The victim is also present before this court with mask. The matter has been settled between the parties. The joint affidavit also has been filed by both the parties.

¶26

In view of the compromise between the parties and

¶27

also, as the victim as well as the complainant who turned hostile in the Trial Court, considering the same, I am of the view, if the application is allowed and parties are permitted to compound the offence, no prejudice will cause to the public at large. Hence, I.A.No.1/2024 is allowed The parties are permitted to compound the offence.

¶28

Accordingly, this petition is allowed .

¶29

Consequently, the criminal proceedings against the petitioner in Spl.C.No.24/2023 arising out of Crime No.101/2022 registered by the Pattanayakanahalli Police Station, pending on the file of Addl. District and Sessions Judge and FTSC-I, Tumakuru, is hereby quashed.

¶30

Sd/JUDGE

¶31

AKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 53 CT:SK

Narayanagowda v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narayanagowda v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr Philip William George Vs State of Karnataka

Mr. Parthasarathy Sampathkumar Vs Zuri Energy Pvt. Ltd.

Sri Sunil G Vs Police Inspector (S.H.O)

Puran Ram Devasi @ Puranram Vs State of Karnataka by

Vijay Kumar H M Vs State by Parappana

Suresh Jain Vs State of Karnataka