High Court Quashes POCSO Proceedings to Protect Matrimonial Harmony and Child Welfare Following Consensual Marriage and Settlement

The applicant was accused of enticing away a 17-year-old minor on 28.03.2021, leading to an FIR lodged by the victim's mother

Following an investigation, the Juvenile Justice Board, Udham Singh Nagar, took cognizance on 06.07.2021 for offenses under Sections 363, 366, 376 of the IPC and Sections 3/4 of the POCSO Act

At the time of the incident, the applicant was also a juvenile

During the trial, the victim (PW-2) testified that the relationship was consensual and no force was used

Since then, both parties attained majority, solemnized their marriage on 12.07.2023, and have a child born on 02.05.2025

The complainant mother and the victim appeared before the High Court seeking to quash the proceedings based on a compromise, stating the FIR was a result of misunderstanding

Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), which grants inherent powers to the High Court to prevent abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice

Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, which allows quashing if parties have amicably resolved disputes and proceedings serve no purpose

Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, which emphasizes preventing extreme injustice despite settlements

Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat regarding the summary of principles for Section 482

State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan, which notes that while serious offenses are generally not quashed, peculiar facts of a case can warrant such an exercise

The court observed that although the charges under the IPC and POCSO Act are serious, the factual matrix had fundamentally changed since the inception of the case.

The court noted that the victim (now a major) testified that she accompanied the applicant voluntarily and denied any forcible physical relationship

The court found that the applicant and victim are now legally married and have a child

Applying the cited precedents, the court reasoned that forcing the husband to face trial for a "consensual love relationship" from their youth would "disturb the settled matrimonial life" and "adversely affect the future and welfare of their minor child"

The court determined that the legal proceedings had become a futility and any further prosecution would be an abuse of process

The court allowed the C-482 application and quashed the chargesheet, the cognizance/challani report dated 06.07.2021, and the entire proceedings of Special Sessions Trial No. 356 of 2021 pending before the Special Judge, POCSO, Rudrapur

All pending applications were disposed of