High Court Quashes POCSO Proceedings to Protect Matrimonial Harmony and Welfare of Parties' Child

The applicant sought quashing of a chargesheet and criminal proceedings under Sections 363, 366, and 376(2)(n) of the IPC and Sections 5(l)/5(j)(ii) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act

The FIR was lodged by the victim's father, alleging the applicant enticed away his minor daughter (aged 16 years and 7 months)

During investigation and trial, the victim testified that she accompanied the applicant voluntarily and they were in a consensual relationship

While the case was pending, both parties attained majority, solemnized a legal marriage, and had a child together

The victim and her mother (the complainant) appeared before the Court, stating they are living happily and do not wish to pursue the prosecution

1. Whether the High Court, in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., should quash criminal proceedings involving serious offences like rape and POCSO when the parties have subsequently married and settled their dispute

2. Whether the continuation of criminal proceedings in the present circumstances would amount to an abuse of the process of law or serve the ends of justice

The Court primarily applied Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) regarding the inherent powers of the High Court to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice

It relied on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, which permits quashing if proceedings are an abuse of process

Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, emphasizing whether injustice results despite a settlement

Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat, summarizing the principles of inherent powers

State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan, which held that even serious offences may be quashed in peculiar facts if no useful purpose is served by trial

The Court evaluated the gravity of the offences—IPC Sections 363, 366, 376 and POCSO—acknowledging their serious nature

However, it contrasted the legal charges with the factual reality: the victim never supported allegations of force or coercion in her 161/164 Cr.P.C. statements or court testimony, consistently maintaining the relationship was consensual

The Court reasoned that since the parties are now legally married, residing together peacefully, and raising a child, the continuation of the trial would "jeopardize the settled matrimonial life" and "adversely affect the welfare and future of their minor child"

Given the complainant’s and victim’s refusal to support the prosecution, the Court determined that the possibility of conviction was remote and trial would be a futile exercise

The Court allowed the C-482 application and quashed the chargesheet, the cognizance order dated 17.03.2023, and the entire proceedings of S.S.T. No. 45 of 2023 pending before the Additional District & Sessions Judge/F.T.S.C., Haridwar