The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday strongly criticised the son of a BJP leader, who is accused of rape on the false promise of marriage, for failing to comply with an earlier direction to deposit maintenance money for the complainant and her child.

Justice M Nagaprasanna was hearing petitions filed by accused Krishna J Rao and his parents seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings initiated against them.

During the hearing, the Court referred to its April 26 order directing Rao to deposit ₹75,000 towards the maintenance of the complainant and her 10-month-old child within one week. Expressing displeasure over the non-compliance, the Court questioned the accused's reluctance to support the child.

"Just because the child is from the lower strata of society, are you abandoning the child? We will not permit that," Justice Nagaprasanna remarked.

Senior Advocate P P Hegde, appearing for the petitioners, submitted that the accused was a student and was unable to comply with the financial condition imposed by the interim order.

The Court, however, observed that responsibility towards the child could not be avoided on such grounds.

"₹75,000 you are not able to pay? Your father is there. If it is not paid, I will dismiss the petitions. The interim order will be vacated. I will record the reasons. A child is born because of your acts and the father does not take responsibility?" the Court said.

Counsel for the complainant informed the Court that the victim's bank account details had already been shared with the petitioners' advocate. Despite this, the amount had not been transferred directly to the complainant. It was submitted that the first instalment had instead been deposited before the Court on May 5, without any communication being made to the complainant regarding the deposit.

The Court further emphasised the welfare of the child, observing that while consensual relations between adults may not ordinarily raise concerns, the birth of a child imposes responsibilities that cannot be ignored.

"Because of your consensual acts, an innocent life is born. That innocent child is now left in the lurch without any means to survive. How are you washing away your hands? Or your parents washing away their hands?" the judge orally observed.

The Court also indicated that it was not inclined to permit withdrawal of the petitions and stated that it intended to decide the matter on merits.

"Both the petitions will definitely stand dismissed. I am not permitting anything to be withdrawn. This is a clear case under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita relating to false promise of marriage. There is no doubt about it. I am going to write it. No withdrawal in this," the Court remarked.

However, the Bench allowed the petitioners to advance arguments on the merits of their challenge and stated that it would consider all submissions before passing a final order.

"You make submissions on merits. I am going to answer it on merits. Herculean efforts you can make. That money has been deposited, we will see. I will pass an order while answering it on merits," the Court said before adjourning the matter.