SONU SARKAR vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2026:UHC:3509

Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
SL.
Date
No.

COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
C528/1619/2023

Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. B.S. Koranga proxy counsel for Mr.
V.K. Guglani, learned counsel for the
applicants.
2. Mr. Rakesh Joshi, learned A.G.A.
along with Mr. Nikhil Bisht, learned Brief
Holder for the State.
3. Mr. Rishabh Bisht, learned counsel for
respondent no.2/complainant.
4. The present C-482 application has
been filed seeking quashing of the impugned
chargesheet, cognizance/ challani report
dated 06.07.2021 passed by the learned
Juvenile Justice Board, Udham Singh Nagar
as well as the entire proceedings of Special
Sessions Trial No.356 of 2021, under
Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Sections
3/4 of the Protection of Children from
Sexual Offences Act, pending in the Court of
learned F.T.C./Additional Sessions
Judge/Special Judge, POCSO, Rudrapur,
District Udham Singh Nagar, on the basis of
compromise entered into between the
parties.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant
would submit that the F.I.R. was initially
lodged by the mother of the victim alleging
therein that on 28.03.2021 the applicant
had enticed away her minor daughter, aged
about 17 years, with an intention to defame
the family. After completion of investigation,
the Investigating Officer submitted the
chargesheet and thereafter, vide order dated
06.07.2021, the learned Juvenile Justice

2026:UHC:3509

Board, Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar took
cognizance and issued challani report
against the applicant under Sections 363,
366, 376 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 of the
POCSO Act. He would further submit that at
the time of the alleged incident, the
applicant himself was a juvenile and was
accordingly declared so by the competent
Court.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant
would further submit that during the course
of trial, the victim was examined as PW-2
and in her testimony before the trial Court
she categorically stated that no physical
relationship was established forcibly by the
applicant and that she had voluntarily
accompanied him as both of them were in a
consensual love relationship. He would
further submit that after attaining majority,
the applicant and the victim solemnized
their marriage on 12.07.2023 and are
presently residing together as husband and
wife; that, out of their wedlock, a girl child
was born on 02.05.2025; that, at the time of
the incident, the victim was about 17 years
of age and was sufficiently mature to
understand the consequences of her acts
and conduct.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant
would also submit that since the applicant
and the victim are now living peacefully
together as husband and wife along with
their child and are happily discharging their
matrimonial obligations, continuation of the
criminal proceedings would serve no fruitful
purpose and would rather adversely affect
their settled matrimonial life as well as the
future of their minor child.
8. The applicant, the complainant-mother
of the victim, and the victim are present

2026:UHC:3509

before the Court along with the minor child
and have been duly identified by their
respective counsel. The complainant
submits that the F.I.R. was lodged due to
misunderstanding and emotional distress at
the relevant point of time and that now the
applicant and her daughter are living
happily together as husband and wife. She
further submits that she does not wish to
pursue the criminal proceedings any
further.
9. Heard learned counsel for the parties
and perused the material available on
record.
10. It is not disputed that at the time of
the alleged incident, the victim was aged
about 17 years. The statement of the victim
recorded before the trial Court reveals that
she had accompanied the applicant
voluntarily and that there was no allegation
of force or coercion against him. It is also
not disputed that both the applicant and the
victim have now attained majority and have
solemnized marriage with each other. From
the said wedlock, a girl child has also been
born and the parties are presently residing
together peacefully as husband and wife.
11. Undoubtedly, the offences alleged
against the applicant under Sections 363,
366, 376 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 of the
POCSO Act are serious in nature. However,
while exercising inherent jurisdiction under
Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court is
required to examine whether continuation of
criminal proceedings would amount to
abuse of the process of law and whether
quashing of proceedings would secure the
ends of justice.
12. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian

2026:UHC:3509

Singh v. State of Punjab has held that the
High Court, in exercise of its inherent
powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., may
quash criminal proceedings where the
parties have amicably resolved their dispute
and continuation of proceedings would serve
no useful purpose. Similarly, in Narinder
Singh and Others v. State of Punjab, the
Hon’ble Apex Court observed that the High
Court must consider whether continuation
of criminal proceedings would result in
extreme injustice despite settlement
between the parties.
13. Further, in Parbatbhai Aahir @
Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and
Others v. State of Gujarat, the Hon’ble
Supreme Court summarized the principles
governing exercise of inherent powers under
Section 482 Cr.P.C. and held that such
power can be exercised to secure the ends of
justice and to prevent abuse of the process
of the Court. Likewise, in State of Madhya
Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan, it was held that
while serious offences ordinarily should not
be quashed on compromise, the High Court
may consider the peculiar facts and
circumstances of each case to determine
whether continuation of proceedings would
be futile.
14. In the present case, this Court finds
that the victim and the applicant are now
legally wedded spouses and are living
happily along with their minor child. The
victim herself has not supported the
prosecution case regarding forcible physical
relations and has unequivocally stated that
she had accompanied the applicant
voluntarily. The complainant has also
expressed her unwillingness to continue
with the prosecution. In such peculiar facts

2026:UHC:3509

and circumstances, continuation of criminal
proceedings would not only disturb the
settled matrimonial life of the parties but
would also adversely affect the future and
welfare of their minor child.
15. In view of the above, and the law laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the
aforesaid judgments, this Court is of the
considered opinion that no useful purpose
would be served by permitting the criminal
proceedings to continue and the same would
amount to abuse of the process of law.
16. Accordingly, the present C-482
application is allowed. The impugned
chargesheet, cognizance/challani report
dated 06.07.2021 passed by the learned
Juvenile Justice Board, Rudrapur, Udham
Singh Nagar, as well as the entire
proceedings of Special Sessions Trial No.356
of 2021 pending before the Court of learned
F.T.C./Additional Sessions Judge/Special
Judge, POCSO, Rudrapur, District Udham
Singh Nagar, are hereby quashed.
17. Pending applications, if any, shall
stand disposed of accordingly.





(Alok Mahra, J.)

08.05.2026
Mamta
MA
MTA
RANI
Digitally signed by MAMTA
RANI
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT
OF UTTARAKHAND,
ou=HIGH COURT OF
UTTARAKHAND,
2.5.4.20=6a812005bebfcf46
f244f3e584af1449e430ef90
0bf09a6d67ebbd64267132
9b, postalCode=263001,
st=Uttarakhand,
serialNumber=5de1751a4f1
d9cabfd54852c9e68911ca8
b66dd26690a191648ab5d8
dd004ef0, cn=MAMTA RANI
Date: 2026.06.03 16:57:17
+05'30'