High Court quashes POCSO proceedings where victim’s hostile testimony and mutual compromise render conviction improbable.

The applicant sought to quash the proceedings of Special Sessions Trial No. 54 of 2022, pending before the Special Sessions Judge (POCSO), Champawat.

The case arose from a complaint filed by the victim's mother, alleging that the applicant and a co-accused enticed her minor daughter, committed physical abuse, and recorded an objectionable video.

Following an investigation, a charge sheet was filed.

During the trial, the victim (P.W.-1) and the complainant (the mother) denied the prosecution's allegations in their depositions.

Consequently, a joint compounding application (I.A. No. 1 of 2026) was filed by the parties, supported by affidavits and the personal appearance of the parties before the High Court, seeking to settle the dispute.

1. Whether the High Court should exercise its inherent jurisdiction to quash criminal proceedings in a POCSO matter based on a compromise when the victim and complainant have resiled from their statements during trial

2. Whether the continuation of a trial, where the possibility of conviction is remote due to a lack of supporting evidence from the complainant and victim, amounts to a denial of justice

The Court applied the principles governing the High Court's inherent power to quash criminal proceedings to prevent the abuse of the process of law.

It relied on a catena of Hon’ble Supreme Court judgments establishing that where a compromise is reached and the possibility of conviction is "remote and bleak," the High Court may quash proceedings to avoid prejudice and injustice to the accused.

The court further applied the principle that inherent jurisdiction should be exercised to ensure real and substantial justice when charges are no longer sustainable in the eyes of law.

The Court noted that the Investigating Officer failed to collect independent corroborative evidence, relying solely on the initial complaint.

Crucially, the victim (P.W.-1) and the mother categorically denied the prosecution's story during both examination-in-chief and cross-examination.

Upon personal interaction with the parties, the Court verified that they had resiled from their earlier statements and denied the occurrence of the incident in their depositions.

The Court reasoned that since the star witnesses did not support the prosecution, no prima facie case remained against the applicant.

It concluded that continuing the trial under such circumstances would be a futile exercise and a denial of complete justice, thus justifying the quashing of the proceedings through the court's inherent jurisdiction.

The Court held that the proceedings in Special Sessions Trial No. 54 of 2022, pending in the Court of Special Sessions Judge (POCSO), Champawat, were unsustainable and ordered them to be quashed qua the applicant.

The C-528 application was disposed of accordingly.