High Court May Quash POCSO Proceedings Where Victim Attains Majority and Solemnizes Marriage With Accused

The applicant sought the quashing of a charge-sheet and summoning order dated 14.11.2024 issued by the Special Judge, POCSO, Rudrapur, in Trial No. 820 of 2024

An F.I.R. was originally lodged on 10.07.2024 by respondent no. 2, alleging the applicant had abducted his then 17-year-old daughter

Following investigation, the applicant was charged under Sections 137(2), 64, and 87 of the B.N.S. and Sections 5/6 of the POCSO Act

Subsequent to the filing of the charge-sheet, the victim attained majority and solemnized marriage with the applicant on 28.03.2025 as per Islamic rites (Nikahnama)

Both families consented to the union, and a compounding application was filed by the parties to terminate the criminal proceedings

1. Whether criminal proceedings involving serious and non-compoundable offences under the POCSO Act and B.N.S. can be quashed under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. (inherent powers) on the basis of a compromise and subsequent marriage

2. Whether the continuation of prosecution in the present circumstances would amount to an abuse of the process of law or defeat the ends of justice

The Court primarily applied the principles governing the inherent jurisdiction of High Courts to quash criminal proceedings based on compromise as established by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in *Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab* (2012), *Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab* (2014), and *Parbatbhai Aahir vs. State of Gujarat* (2017)

These precedents mandate that while heinous crimes usually cannot be quashed via settlement, the High Court may exercise its discretion if the dispute is predominantly private and continuation would be futile or detrimental to justice

The court also considered the statutory rigour of the POCSO Act in light of the victim's subsequent majority and marital status

The Court observed that although the victim was a minor at the time of the incident, triggering the POCSO Act, the "subsequent developments" were of paramount importance

The victim had voluntarily married the applicant upon reaching majority and was living peacefully with him, discharging marital obligations

The Court reasoned that since the victim and her father (the original informant) no longer supported the prosecution, there was no probability of conviction

Crucially, the Court noted that maintaining the criminal trial would "disturb the settled matrimonial life" of the parties and adversely impact their future, thus rendering the prosecution a tool of harassment rather than justice

The Court allowed the C-528 application and quashed the charge-sheet, the summoning order dated 14.11.2024, and the entire criminal proceedings in Special Sessions Trial No. 820 of 2024

All pending applications were disposed of accordingly