IMPORTANT POINT
Ends of justice are higher than ends of mere law though justice has got to be administered in accordance with laws enacted by Legislature.

ORDER

Petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.672/2021 of Chavara Thekkumbhagam Police Station, Kollam District, which is now pending as S.C. No.1359/2022 on the file of the Fast Track Special Court, Karunagappally. The 1 st accused alleged to have committed the offences under Sections 363 and 376 (2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 4 r/w. Sections 3(a), 6 r/w. Section 5(j)(ii),(l), 21 r/w.19(1) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

2. Allegation which led to registration of Crime No.672/2021 of Chavara Thekkum-bhagam police station is that, on 02.01.2021, at about 08.00 A.M, the 1 st petitioner/1st accused kidnapped the victim and committed rape on her, as a result of which she became pregnant. The 2 nd and 3rd petitioners/who are parents of the victim have been arrayed as the accused on the ground that they did not inform the matter to the authorities. Therefore, they allegedly committed the offences under the provisions of Section 21 r/w. 19 of the POCSO Act.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the 1st petitioner and the alleged victim were in a relationship. It is submitted that, immediately after the victim attained the age of majority, a marriage was solemnized between the 1st petitioner and the alleged victim. Attention of this Court is drawn to Annexures A4 and A5 which would show that a marriage was solemnized between the 1 st petitioner and the alleged victim on 17.09.2023. It is submitted that a child was born out of the relationship between the 1 st petitioner and the victim. It is submitted that the 1st petitioner and the victim are now living together as husband and wife with their child and therefore, the continuance of proceedings will not be in the interest of the victim. It is submitted that, in such circumstances, this Court has held in Vishnu v. State of Kerala [2023 (4) KHC 1], that proceedings can be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

4. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the victim (the 3 rd respondent).

5. Learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent (victim) would confirm that the victim is now living with the 1 st petitioner as his legally wedded wife along with her child. Reference is made to Annexure A3 affidavit executed by the 3rd respondent.

6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the victim, I am of the view that, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the proceedings against the petitioners can be quashed in exercise of the jurisdiction vested in this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No public purpose will be served by continuing with the the proceedings against the petitioners. In Vishnu (Supra), it was held as follows:—

“13. The Apex Court in Saju P.R. v. State of Kerala (Criminal Appeal No. 1740 of 2019, decided on 22.11.2019), quashed a ‘rape case’ on the ground of settlement between the accused and the victim for ‘doing complete justice to the parties concerned’. In Anand D.V. v. State and Another (Criminal Appeal Nos. 394-395 of 2021, decided on 12.04.2021), the Apex Court allowed the compromise and quashed the proceedings for rape on the ground that the accused married the victim. The crime therein was registered against the accused on the complaint of the victim for offences under sections 376 and 380 IPC, alleging that the accused, by giving a false promise of marriage, had sexual intercourse with her, but the promise was not honoured. However, after the registration of the FIR, both got married, and they approached the High Court of Delhi, seeking to quash the proceedings invoking section 482 of Cr.P.C read with Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The High Court dismissed their plea, and therefore, both preferred separate appeals at the Apex Court. The Apex Court allowed the appeals and quashed the proceedings holding that the parties were h