Non-compoundable POCSO proceedings may be quashed under Section 482 CrPC where parties marry and establish a family.

The applicant sought quashing of the charge-sheet dated 25 September 2022, summoning order dated 28 September 2022, and the proceedings in Special Sessions Trial No. 58 of 2022 pending before the Special Sessions Judge, Almora, for offences under Sections 363, 366A and 376 IPC and Sections 5(l)/6 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

The prosecution arose from an FIR lodged after respondent no. 3 went away with the applicant.

During the proceedings, the applicant and respondent no. 3 filed a joint compounding application, stating that they had married, were living together happily, and had a baby boy.

Respondent no. 3 appeared personally before the Court and stated that she did not wish to prosecute the applicant further.

The State opposed the application, contending that the alleged offences were non-compoundable and offences against society.

Whether the High Court could exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings involving non-compoundable offences under Sections 363, 366A and 376 IPC and Sections 5(l)/6 of the POCSO Act on the basis of the parties’ subsequent marriage and settlement?

Whether, in the circumstances of the parties’ marriage, continuing cohabitation, child, and respondent no. 3’s unwillingness to prosecute, continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of process or be contrary to the ends of justice?

The Court exercised its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to secure the ends of justice and prevent abuse of the process of court.

It relied on B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675; Nikhil Merchant v. CBI, (2008) 9 SCC 650; Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303; and Dimpey Gujral v. Union Territory of Chandigarh, Transfer Petition (Criminal) No. 115 of 2012, for the principle that the High Court may quash criminal proceedings involving non-compoundable offences in appropriate cases where continuation would not serve the interests of justice.

The Court also followed Ayyub Malik v. State of Uttarakhand, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 637, in which the Supreme Court quashed similar proceedings after considering that the accused and the prosecutrix had married and were living together peacefully.

The Court distinguished the technical bar on statutory compounding from the broader inherent power of quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

The Court recognised that the alleged offences were not ordinarily compoundable and that the State characterised them as offences against society.

However, it treated the case as exceptional because the applicant and respondent no. 3 had married, were residing together as a family, had a child, and respondent no. 3 personally affirmed that she was happy in the marriage and did not wish to prosecute the applicant.

Applying the principles governing the exercise of Section 482 jurisdiction and relying on the analogous decision in Ayyub Malik, the Court held that compelling the parties to undergo a criminal trial in these circumstances would not advance the interests of justice.

It therefore accepted the settlement and concluded that the proceedings should be brought to an end.

It quashed the charge-sheet dated 25 September 2022, the summoning order dated 28 September 2022, and the entire proceedings in Special Sessions Trial No. 58 of 2022, State v. Himanshu Arya, pending before the Special Sessions Judge, Almora, concerning Sections 363, 366A and 376 IPC and Sections 5(l)/6 of the POCSO Act.

The criminal miscellaneous application and any pending applications were accordingly disposed of.