Delhi High Court

Quashing of POCSO and Rape FIR permissible where prosecutrix marries accused to ensure marital harmony.

Ankit Kumar Yadav vs The State Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.

Delhi High CourtJUDGMENT: May 07, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The Petitioner sought the quashing of FIR No. 235/2024 (P.S. Amar Colony) registered under Sections 376 IPC and 6 of the POCSO Act

Source reference: p.1

The FIR was originally filed by the prosecutrix alleging inappropriate touching and forcible sexual intercourse resulting in pregnancy while she was a minor in the 12th grade

Source reference: p.1-2

During the trial, the prosecutrix turned hostile, claiming that the sexual relationship was consensual, they were in love, and she intended to marry the accused

Source reference: p.2

After attaining majority, the prosecutrix entered into a settlement deed with the Petitioner, stating she wished to marry him and had no objection to quashing the proceedings

Source reference: p.3
02

Issues

1. Whether the High Court should exercise its inherent powers to quash an FIR involving non-compoundable serious offences like Section 376 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act based on a compromise between the parties

Source reference: p.3-4

2. Whether the continuation of criminal proceedings would serve a meaningful purpose when the chances of conviction are bleak and the parties intend to lead a harmonious married life

Source reference: p.3-4
03

Law Applied

The Court primarily exercised its inherent powers under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023

Source reference: p.4

The Court relied on established legal principles holding that where the victim has reached majority and the parties intend to marry, the court may quash proceedings to ensure family harmony, especially when the prosecutrix has already turned hostile in her testimony

Source reference: p.2-3

The court further cited the precedents of Mohd. Parwej v. State (2026) and Harmeet Singh v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2026), which permit quashing in similar circumstances to prevent the "hanging sword" of prosecution from disrupting future family life

Source reference: p.4
04

Reasoning

The Court conducted an in-chamber interaction with the prosecutrix and her parents to ensure the settlement was voluntary and without coercion

Source reference: p.3

It observed that the prosecutrix’s testimony during the trial was contradictory; she had already resiled from her initial allegations during cross-examination, claiming the relations were consensual

Source reference: p.2

The Court reasoned that since the parties have now decided to marry and the prosecutrix has attained majority, the chances of conviction are "very bleak"

Source reference: p.3

It determined that trial continuation would result in unnecessary trauma and inexorable apprehension for the couple, whereas quashing the FIR would facilitate peace and a smooth family life

Source reference: p.3-4
05

Holding

The Court answered the issues in the affirmative, holding that securing the ends of justice outweighed the technicalities of the non-compoundable nature of the offences given the specific marital context

The Court quashed FIR No. 235/2024 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. The petition and all pending applications were disposed of accordingly

Source reference: p.4
Delhi High Court

Original Court PDF

Ankit Kumar YadavvsThe State Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.

Delhi High Court · May 07, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment