S. Serto, J.

Heard Mr. T.T. Tara, learned counsel for the petitioners and also heard Ms. M. Tang, learned Addl. PP appearing for the State of Arunachal Pradesh.

2. This is an application under section 482 of Cr.P.C., 1973 praying for quashing and setting aside the Charge-Sheet No. 97/17, dated 22.12.2017 of Women Police Station Case No. 35/17, registered under Sections 376 (2) (i)/506 of IPC read with Section 6 of POCSO Act which was submitted before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Capital Complex at Yupia, Arunachal Pradesh on 17.04.2017.

3. The brief facts leading to filing of this petition are that-

On 17.04.2017, the petitioner No. 1/the victim lodged a complaint before the Officer-in-Charge of Women Police Station, Itanagar stating that she had been raped by the petitioner No. 2 in whose house she was employed as a maid servant. Following the submission of the complaint an FIR case was registered under Section 376 (2)(i)/506 of IPC read with Section 6 of POCSO Act on the same day and investigation was conducted on the allegation leveled against the petitioner No. 2. In the course of investigation, the statement of the petitioner No. 1 was recorded both under Section 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. She was also examined by a Medical Board for determination of her age and as per the findings of the Medical Board, the age of the petitioner No. 1/the victim was stated to be in between 14-16 years. After investigation was completed, the Investigating Officer submitted the Charge-Sheet under sections law mentioned above before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yupia.

4. While the Charge-Sheet is pending for committal to the Court of learned Special Judge. POCSO both the accused and the victim have approached this Court by filing the present petition praying for quashing and setting aside the Charge Sheet submitted by the Investigating Officer.

5. Mr. T. T. Tara, learned counsel has submitted that since the parties have come to a compromise settlement, it would be futile to go ahead with the trial of the case and besides it would help to protect the harmony of the family which has been restored in the course of time if the matter is let to rest at this juncture. Therefore, this Court may be gracious enough to quash and set aside the Charge-Sheet in order to avoid abuse of process of the Court and for fomenting the peace and tranquillity in the family.

6. Mr. Tara sought to support his plea by citing judgment of this Court passed in Crl. Petn. 9 (AP) 2017, particularly, to 2nd paragraph of page of the judgment. The contents of the 2nd paragraph reads as follows:

In (2014) 9 SCC 653 Yogendra Yadav & Ors. v. State of Jharkhand and Another; it has been held that the High Court can quash criminal proceeding under section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 even though offence alleged is non-compoundable if the parties have amicably settled their dispute and victim has no objection. Further; this would depend on the facts of the each case. Offences which involve moral turpitude/grape offences like rape, murder cannot be effected by quash proceeding because they have harmful effect on the society and are not restricted to two individuals or groups. However; where the High Court is convinced that the offences are entirely personal in nature not effecting public peace or tranquillity and quashing of proceedings on account of compromise would secure ends of justice, it may quash the same. In such cases, prosecution become lame end pursuing such lame prosecution become waste of time and energy and also likely to unsettle the compromise and obstruct restoration of peace".

Mr. Tara also cited the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. v. Bhajan Lal & Ors., reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335. the relevant paragraph 102, the same reads as follows:-

"102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series