Court Rules Section 69 of BNS, 2023 Not Attracted Against Woman Accused; Investigation to Continue for Data Transfer and IT Act Offences
In a significant ruling delivered on September 25, 2026, the Karnataka High Court partly quashed the First Information Report (FIR) filed against Smt. H.K. Prathibha in a case involving alleged unauthorized sharing of photographs and videographs. The FIR, registered at Subramanyapura Police Station, included charges under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), Sections 308(2), 351(2) read with Section 3(5) of BNS, and Sections 66E and 67A of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
The petitioner, legally wedded wife of accused No.1, challenged the FIR on the grounds that Section 69 of the BNS, 2023, which deals with certain offences, could not be applied against her as a woman under the facts of the case. The complainant alleged that she had a relationship with accused No.1 and accused No.2 (the petitioner) took and shared her photographs and videographs without consent. The complaint also alleged attempts to blackmail the complainant.
Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde, after hearing submissions from counsel for both sides and reviewing the case records, observed that the offence under Section 69 of the BNS, 2023, was not attracted against the petitioner. The Court held that the allegations in the complaint did not indicate the petitioner's commission of any offence under this provision. Consequently, the FIR was quashed to the extent it charged the petitioner under Section 69.
However, the Court noted that allegations regarding the transfer of the complainant's photographs and videographs without her consent and knowledge remained. The petitioner contended that she did not transmit any such data and suggested her mobile phone might have been misused by others. The Court acknowledged that this was a disputed fact requiring thorough investigation. It directed the police to continue their probe into offences under the Information Technology Act and other relevant provisions. If the investigation finds no evidence of unauthorized data transfer by the petitioner, no charges should be framed against her.
The Court clarified that this partial quashing does not affect any allegations against accused No.1, who was not a party to the present petition. Other contentions raised by the petitioner were kept open for consideration at appropriate stages.
This judgment underscores the careful application of the newly enacted Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, ensuring that provisions are not misapplied, especially concerning gender-specific aspects of offences, while balancing the need for comprehensive investigation of cyber and related crimes.
Bottom Line:
FIR partly quashed - Woman arraigned as accused No.2 could not be prosecuted for offence under Section 69 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, as said provision was not attracted against her on allegations in complaint - However, allegations regarding transfer of complainant's photographs/videographs without consent required investigation and proceedings for offences under Information Technology Act and other alleged offences were permitted to continue.
Statutory provision(s): Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 69, 308(2), 351(2) read with Section 3(5); Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 528; Information Technology Act, 2000 Sections 66E, 67A
Smt. H.K. Prathibha v. State of Karnataka, (Karnataka) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2993425
