Petitioners accused under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and IPC Section 363 granted liberty as charges were found to be wrongly applied
In a significant ruling, the Karnataka High Court has set aside an order of remand against petitioners Murali B.N. and others, accused of offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The judgment, delivered by Justice M. Nagaprasanna, found the charges of kidnapping to be unfounded as the complainant's daughter, who is above 18 years, married the petitioner of her own volition.
The case originated from a complaint by the mother of the woman, alleging that her daughter was kidnapped by her husband, petitioner No.1. However, the court recognized that the daughter had willingly entered into marriage, rendering the application of Section 363 IPC inappropriate. The court noted that "the offence under Section 363 IPC is wrongly laid as the daughter acted on her own volition."
The petitioners were initially remanded to judicial custody based on these charges. However, Justice Nagaprasanna emphasized that the offences in question were bailable, and thus, the remand was erroneous. "Since the offences were bailable, a remand to judicial custody could not have been passed by the concerned Court," stated the judgment.
The High Court's decision to allow the petition led to the setting aside of the previous order dated February 16, 2026, passed in Crime No.25/2026 by the 32nd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru. The judgment mandates the immediate release of the petitioners from custody, underscoring the abuse of legal process in this instance.
Legal representatives for the petitioners, led by Advocate Hemantha B., argued successfully that the charges were not substantiated, leading to their clients' release. The court's directive to the registry for communicating the release to jail authorities ensures compliance with the legal process.
This case highlights the critical importance of accurate charge application and the judiciary's role in safeguarding individual liberty against erroneous judicial processes.
Bottom Line:
Petitioners accused of offences under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) sections and Section 363 IPC - Daughter of complainant beyond 18 years and married petitioner - Offence under Section 363 IPC wrongly laid as daughter acted on her own volition - Petitioners entitled to be set at liberty as offences were bailable and remand to judicial custody was erroneous.
Statutory provision(s): Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Sections 115(2), 137(2), 351(2), 3(5), 329(4); Indian Penal Code, Section 363
Murali B.N. v. State of Karnataka, (Karnataka) : Law Finder Doc id # 2859287
