POCSO FIR Quashed as Parties Contracted Valid Marriage Post-Majority and Lead Stable Matrimonial Life.

The petitioner sought quashing of FIR No. 177/2023 registered under Section 363 IPC (later adding Sections 366/376 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act).

In March 2023, the petitioner and the victim fled their homes and performed a marriage ceremony in Bihar.

At the time, the victim was allegedly a minor, and though she supported the petitioner in her Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement and trial testimony, she was treated as a minor by the prosecution.

After reaching the age of majority/discretion, the parties formally registered their marriage on January 21, 2025, and were blessed with a baby girl on February 2, 2026.

The State verified the authenticity of the marriage and birth certificates.

Whether the High Court should exercise its inherent powers to quash criminal proceedings involving non-compoundable and serious offences (POCSO/Rape) when the parties have subsequently entered into a valid marriage and stable family life.

The court primarily exercised its inherent powers under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 (the successor to Section 482 Cr.P.C.).

It relied on the principles established in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303] and Narinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr. [(2014) 6 SCC 466], which allow for the quashing of non-compoundable cases if the Court is satisfied that the purpose of the proceedings is exhausted and the chance of conviction is remote.

The court also cited recent precedents Mohd. Parwej v. State [2026 SCC OnLine Del 1030] and Harmeet Singh v. State of GNCT Delhi & Ors. [2026:DHC:3142] regarding quashing in the context of matrimonial stability.

The Court observed that the prosecutrix had consistently refused to support the prosecution’s allegations of coercion, claiming she married the petitioner of her own free will.

While she was technically a minor at the time of the incident, the Court noted that she had since attained the "age of discretion" and voluntarily formalized the marriage.

The Court reasoned that because the parties are now living a "blissful matrimonial life" and have a child, the "scope of conviction was remote and bleak".

Consequently, the Court determined that continuing the criminal trial would serve no "meaningful purpose" and would instead "disrupt their stable family-life".

Exercising its powers under Section 528 BNSS, the Court quashed FIR No. 177/2023 and all consequential proceedings.

The petition was disposed of accordingly.