Mother Very Poor & Unable To Maintain Child: Karnataka HC Quashes Criminal Proceedings Against Mother Accused Of Allegedly Selling Her Girl Child

The Court allowed the petition under Section 482 of the CrPC filed by the mother (Petitioner) accused under Section 370 read with Section 34 of the IPC and Section 81 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (JJ Act). The Petitioner was accused of selling her girl child from her relationship with a man after being deserted by her husband. The Petitioner, who claimed was unable to maintain her child, allegedly handed over the baby to a married man with no children who intended to adopt the child but did not follow the adoption procedure.

A Single Bench of Justice K. Natarajan observed, “Having heard the arguments and perusal of the records, would reveal that the petitioner delivered a female child and the child was born out of intimacy with another person and the petitioner is said to be very poor and unable to maintain the child. Later, she came in contact with accused No.2 and through him she sold the child to accused No.3, who is said to be a married man having no issues for about 14 years, who intended to adopt the child. Of course, there is a violation of JJ Rules i.e., the petitioner has handed over the child to accused No.3 without following the adoption procedure by selling the child for Rs.15,000/-.”

Advocate Sharada N. appeared for the Petitioner, while HCGP M.M. Waheeda represented the Respondents.

A complaint was filed by a Child Protection Officer (CPO), leading to the registration of an FIR against the Petitioner. The prosecution alleged that the Petitioner had sold her child to a married man for Rs. 15,000. The child was later rescued from Maharashtra by the police.

The Petitioner contended that she was a deserted woman and she already had a male child of 11 years. She submitted that since she was coolie, she was unable to maintain the child, and therefore decided to sell her child to the married man. Since the married man had no issues, he intended to adopt the child but did not follow the procedure. It was submitted that the married man had no intention to exploit the child and the Court had already quashed the criminal proceedings against him.

The High Court observed that while the Petitioner had violated the JJ Act by handing over the child without following adoption procedures, there was no evidence to establish any criminal intent.

The Court noted that the criminal proceedings against the married man were already quashed by the Bench in April, 2024 wherein it was held that “there is no offence under Section 370 of IPC is made out and there is no intention to abduct the child or human trafficking of the child for the purpose of begging etc., by taking the child outside the State. The bona fide intention of accused No.3 is to get the child adopted. There is no criminality to conduct the trial against this petitioner.”

Consequently, the Court quashed the criminal proceedings against the Petitioner as well.

Accordingly, the High Court allowed the Petition.

Cause Title: Mandara v. State & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024:KHC:44144)

Click here to read/download the Order