Section 482 BNSS | Anticipatory Bail Mandatory for Non-Life Imprisonment Offences Under Child Marriage Act If Accused Has Clean Record : Karnataka HC

The Karnataka High Court recently granted anticipatory bail to four accused in a case registered under Sections 9, 10, and 11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006. The judgment underscores that offences not punishable with life imprisonment or death warrant the grant of anticipatory bail, provided the accused have no criminal antecedents and cooperate with the investigation.

Background & Facts

The Dispute

The case involves a complaint filed by a Social Worker attached to the District Child Protection Unit, Chitradurga, alleging that the marriage of a minor girl was performed with the first petitioner on 15.12.2025. The complaint stated that the petitioners, including the parents of both the minor girl and the first petitioner, were aware of the victim's minority at the time of the marriage. The marriage was reportedly conducted in a temple in their village.

Key Facts

• 12.01.2026: Social Worker received a report about the marriage of the victim girl with the first petitioner on 15.12.2025
• Victim: A minor girl, whose marriage was performed with the first petitioner
• Accused No. 1: T. Sridara, the husband of the minor girl
• Accused No. 2: Chandrapa, father of the victim girl
• Accused Nos. 3 and 4: Parents of the first petitioner
• No allegation of sexual assault by the first petitioner post-marriage
• Offences: Under Sections 9, 10, and 11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006
• Crime No. 25/2026 registered by Nayakanahatti Police Station, Chitradurga District

Procedural History

• FIR Registration: Crime No. 25/2026 registered for offences under Sections 9, 10, and 11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006
• 15.03.2026: Petitioners filed Criminal Misc. No. 226/2026 before the Sessions Court seeking anticipatory bail
• 09.03.2026: Sessions Court rejected the anticipatory bail application
• Subsequent Filing: Petitioners filed Criminal Petition No. 4528 of 2026 before the Karnataka High Court under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023

Relief Sought

The petitioners sought anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No. 25/2026, arguing that:

• The offences under the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 are not punishable with life imprisonment or death
• They have no criminal antecedents
• They are willing to cooperate with the investigation

The Legal Issue

The central question before the Court was whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the accused under Sections 9, 10, and 11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, given that the offences are not punishable with life imprisonment or death and the accused have no criminal antecedents.

Arguments Presented

For the Petitioners

• The offences under Sections 9, 10, and 11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 do not attract punishment of life imprisonment or death
• The petitioners have no criminal antecedents
• They are willing to cooperate with the police investigation and appear before the court as required
• The Sessions Court erred in rejecting their anticipatory bail application

For the Respondent

The State, represented by the Additional State Public Prosecutor, opposed the grant of anticipatory bail, though the specific grounds for opposition were not detailed in the judgment.

The Court's Analysis

The Court observed the following key points:

1. Nature of Offences: The offences under Sections 9, 10, and 11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 are not punishable with life imprisonment or death. This is a critical factor in determining the grant of anticipatory bail.

2. Absence of Criminal Antecedents: The petitioners have no prior criminal record, which weighs in favor of granting bail.

3. Cooperation with Investigation: The petitioners expressed their willingness to cooperate with the police investigation and comply with any conditions imposed by the Court.

4. No Allegation of Sexual Assault: There is no allegation in the FIR that the first petitioner committed any sexual assault on the victim girl after the marriage.

The Court relied on the principle that anticipatory bail should not be denied merely because the offence is serious, especially when the punishment does not include life imprisonment or death. The Court emphasized the need to balance the rights of the accused with the interests of justice.

"The petitioners undisputedly do not have any criminal antecedents and they have undertaken to co-operate with the police for the purpose of investigation."

"The said offences are not punishable with death or life imprisonment."

The Verdict

The Karnataka High Court allowed the petition and granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions:

1. The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order
2. Each petitioner shall execute a personal bond for Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer
3. The petitioners shall regularly appear before the Trial Court unless exempted for valid reasons
4. The petitioners shall not tamper with prosecution witnesses and shall cooperate with the police investigation
5. The petitioners shall not involve themselves in similar offences in the future

What This Means For Similar Cases

Anticipatory Bail Not Automatic, But Not Denied Solely on Gravity

• Courts are increasingly recognizing that anticipatory bail should not be denied solely on the gravity of the offence, especially when the punishment does not include life imprisonment or death
• The absence of criminal antecedents and willingness to cooperate with the investigation are significant factors in granting bail

Prohibition of Child Marriage Act: A Balanced Approach

• Sections 9, 10, and 11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 criminalize the act of performing, promoting, or permitting child marriages
• However, the Court's approach in this case suggests that bail considerations under these sections will focus on:
  • The nature of punishment prescribed
  • The accused's criminal history
  • The accused's cooperation with the investigation

Practical Implications for Practitioners

• For Defence Lawyers: Emphasize the absence of criminal antecedents and the accused's willingness to cooperate in bail applications under similar statutes
• For Prosecutors: While opposing bail, focus on specific risks such as witness tampering or flight risk, rather than relying solely on the gravity of the offence
• For Trial Courts: Ensure that bail conditions are proportionate to the offence and do not impose undue hardship on the accused while safeguarding the interests of justice