Overview
- Justice M Nagaprasanna issued the October 25 order, finding the parties' communications indicative of consensual acts.
- State counsel opposed quashing and maintained that consent should be decided at trial, a position the court rejected in light of the record.
- The judgment noted the chats were "not in good taste" and did not reproduce them, stating they nevertheless showed consent.
- According to case reports, the pair connected on Bumble, kept in touch via Instagram, met on August 11, and the police complaint was dated August 13 under Section 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
- The defence, represented by Advocate Athreya C Shekar, argued police ignored key photos, videos, and messages, while Additional SPP BN Jagadesha argued for trial; the court said continuing the case would risk a miscarriage of justice.