Suresh Naik @ Suresha Vs the State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Karnataka HC (2026)

Suresh Naik @ Suresha Vs the State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Criminal petition allowed; proceedings pending in Spl.C.C.No.1164/2025 on the file of the Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, FTSC-II, Bengaluru, against the petitioners (accused Nos. 2 and 3) are quashed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal proceedings in Spl.C.C.No.1164/2025 against the petitioners (accused Nos. 2 and 3, parents of accused No.1), who were charge-sheeted only under Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Restraint Act with no independent incriminating material against them, should be quashed in view of the acquittal of accused No.1 after a full-fledged trial in Spl.C.C.No.1881/2024. +1 more

Court's answer

Except for their relationship with accused No.1, there is no independent, substantive or incriminating material placed on record to prima facie establish the petitioners' active involvement or culpability.

Ratio / Principle

In the backdrop of the acquittal of the prime accused after a full-fledged trial, continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioners for the very same transaction and on the same set of allegations would be wholly unsustainable; permitting such prosecution would amount to unnecessary harassment and abuse of the process of law, and would serve no useful purpose as no additional or incriminating material was forthcoming despite the chargesheet.

Key takeaways

If indulgence is declined, the petitioners, despite the acquittal of accused No.1, would be compelled to undergo the rigours of a prolonged criminal trial, which would be oppressive, defeat the ends of justice, and clearly amount to misuse of the criminal process.ratio¶¶52
This is a fit case for exercising the inherent jurisdiction vested in the Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice; interference at this stage is warranted.ratio¶¶53

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Petition – quashing – inherent powers – S.482 Cr.PC / S.528 BNSS – Petitioners are the parents (accused Nos. 2 and 3) of accused No.1, charge-sheeted along with him for offences under S.376 IPC, Ss.5(L) and 6 POCSO Act, 2012 and S.9 Prohibition of Child Marriage Restraint Act (Spl.C.C.No.1164/2025, Crime No.246/2024, Bagalagunte P.S., Bengaluru) – Special Court, after a full-fledged trial, acquitted accused No.1 on merits of S.376 IPC, S.6 POCSO Act and S.9 Prohibition of Child Marriage Act in Spl.C.C.No.1881/2024; neither the victim nor the State challenged the acquittal and it has attained finality – Petitioners were charge-sheeted only under S.9 of the Act; except their relationship with accused No.1, no independent, substantive or incriminating material against them – Continuation of proceedings against the parents for the very same transaction and same allegations after the principal accused's acquittal held wholly unsustainable, oppressive and an abuse of the criminal process – Inherent jurisdiction under S.528 BNSS exercised – Criminal petition allowed; proceedings in Spl.C.C.No.1164/2025 quashed.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1254 CRL.P No. 15472 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 15472 OF 2025

BETWEEN:

SURESH NAIK @ SURESHA

S/O LATE RAMANAYAKA AGED 54 YEARS, R/AT NO. 120, KERGALLI VILLAGE AT POST, JAYAPURA HOBLI, MYSORE - 570 026.

SIDDARAJAMMA

Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

W/O SURESH AGED 53 YEARS, R/AT NO. 10/30, 1ST CROSS, NEAR KAMALA CLINIC, BHEL MINI COLONY, T. DASARAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 057.

…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. MANJUNATH M.R, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BAGALAGUNTE P.S., BENGALURU,

REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU - 560 019.

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1254 CRL.P No. 15472 of 2025

HC-KAR

SMT. SARASWATHI AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS W/O NOT KNOWN SUPERVISOR CHILD DEVELOPMENT OFFICE YELANDUR TALUK CHAMARAJANAGARA - 571 441.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. ANOOPU KUMAR, HCGP FOR R1; R2 - SARASWATHI, SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN SPL.C.C.NO.1164/2025 REGISTERED FOR OFFENCE P/U/S 376 OF IPC AND SEC. 5(L), 6 OF POCSO ACT, 2012 AND SEC. 9 OF PROHIBITION OF CHILD MARRIAGE RESTRAINT ACT BY BAGALAGUNTE P.S BENGALURU, IN CR.NO.246/2024 AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER/ ACCUSED NO.2 AND 3 IS CONCERNED, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CC AND SJ, FTSC-II, BENGALURU.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

ORAL ORDER

The caption petition is filed by accused nos.2 and 3, who are the parents of accused no.1, who was charge sheeted for the offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC and Sections 5(L) and 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and

3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1254 CRL.P No. 15472 of 2025

HC-KAR

Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Restraint Act in C.C.No.1164/2025.

The present petition is instituted by the petitioners, who are none other than the parents of accused No.1. It is their categorical contention that they have been arrayed as accused solely on account of their familial relationship with the prime accused, without any independent or incriminating material attributed to them. The petitioners seek quashing of the proceedings primarily on the ground that the Special Court, after conducting a full-fledged trial, has acquitted accused No.1 of the offences punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal

Code, Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has further brought to the notice of this Court

that neither the victim nor the State has chosen to challenge or assail the said judgment of acquittal rendered

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1254 CRL.P No. 15472 of 2025

HC-KAR

in Spl.C.C.No.1881/2024, and the same has thus attained finality.

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel for the State, and upon a careful perusal of the material placed on record, this Court has bestowed its anxious consideration to the judgment of acquittal passed by the Special Court in Spl.C.C.No.1881/2024.

It is not in dispute that the gist of the prosecution case was directed primarily against accused No.1, who was charged with grave offences under Section 376 of the IPC, Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act. The Special Court, upon appreciation of oral and documentary evidence and after a full-fledged trial, has acquitted accused No.1 on merits. The petitioners herein, who are the parents of accused No.1, were charge-sheeted only in respect of the offence punishable under Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child

5 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1254 CRL.P No. 15472 of 2025

HC-KAR

Marriage Act. Except for their relationship with accused No.1, there is no independent, substantive or incriminating material placed on record to prima facie establish their active involvement or culpability.

In the backdrop of the acquittal of the prime accused after a full-fledged trial, the continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioners for the very same transaction and on the same set of allegations would be wholly unsustainable. Permitting the prosecution to proceed against the parents, when the foundation of the case against the principal accused has failed on merits, would amount to subjecting the petitioners to unnecessary harassment and would result in abuse of the process of law. More so, when no additional or incriminating material has been forthcoming despite the filing of the chargesheet, the continuation of proceedings against the petitioners would serve no useful purpose.

6 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1254 CRL.P No. 15472 of 2025

HC-KAR

This Court is also mindful of the fact that if

indulgence is declined at this stage, the petitioners, despite the acquittal of accused No.1, would be compelled to undergo the rigours and ordeal of a prolonged criminal

trial, which would not only be oppressive but would also defeat the ends of justice. Such a course would clearly amount to misuse of the criminal process.

In these circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that this is a fit case for exercising the inherent jurisdiction vested in this Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to prevent abuse of process and to secure the ends of justice. Accordingly, interference at this stage is warranted.

Accordingly, this Court passes the following:

ORDER

i. The criminal petition is allowed;

7 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1254 CRL.P No. 15472 of 2025

HC-KAR

ii. The proceedings pending in

Spl.C.C.No.1164/2025 on the file of Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, FTSC-II, Bengaluru, are hereby quashed.

Sd/(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE

HDK

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3