JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. D. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. L. Hage, learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State of Arunachal Pradesh.

2. This application is filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, praying for invoking the inherent jurisdiction in quashing and setting aside the proceedings of Itanagar Women Police Station Case No.28/2020, registered under Section 363/376 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, read with Section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012, corresponding to POCSO Case No.09/2022, which is pending before the Court of learned Special Judge (POCSO Act) at Yupia, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh.

3. The brief facts leading to filing of the present petition, is stated as under:-

“On 20.03.2020, a missing complaint was lodged before the Officer-in-Charge, Naharlagun, Police Station by petitioner No.1, Shri Tame Talling to the effect that his sister-Miss Tame Yatang (petitioner No.2) is missing since 18.03.2020, after appearing her Class-X CBSE examination. Later on, the said complaint was forwarded to the Itanagar Women Police Station, which was registered as WPS Case No.28/2020, under Section 363/376 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, read with Section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. It is further stated that the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 were in love relationship for 4(four) years prior to the filing of the said FIR/missing report. The petitioner No. 3 (alleged accused) used to work as a gardener at the flower Nursery of victim’s aunt house. After knowing the relationship between the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3, her aunt terminated the petitioner No.3 from his job. Thereafter, the petitioner No.3 went to Mumbai (Maharashtra) and worked there in a factory, namely, Max Spare Company located at Paliphata, Khopoli. However, the petitioner Nos.2 and 3 were in constant touch through facebook and over phone. On dated 18.03.2020, the petitioner No.2, after completion of her Class-X CBSE examination, went to Mumbai of her own to meet her boyfriend (petitioner No.3) without informing her family members and reached Mumbai on 21.03.2020. The petitioner No.2 stayed with the petitioner No.3 at his room allotted by the Company. During her stay with the petitioner No.3, they had entered into sexual intercourse many times, which was consensual. Later, after filing of the FIR, the Arunachal Police track down her location and in coordination with the Maharashtra Police, brought back both of them to Itanagar, Arunachal Pradesh. During the course of investigation, the age of the petitioner No.2/victim was found to be about 16 years. After the completion of the investigation the case was chargesheeted, vide charge-sheet No.12/21 dated 05.02.2021, under Section 363/376 of Indian Penal Code, read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012, before the Court of learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Yupia, which is now at the stage of appearance. It is further stated that the FIR was lodged by the petitioner No.1 in order to trace his missing sister, and when she was brought back here in Itanagar, the family members from both the parties discussed the matter with the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3, who were in love relationship and they came to know that the petitioner No.2 was already pregnant from their relationship and they were ready to marry each other. Hence on 26.09.2020, the parties entered into a Marriage Agreement in presence of family members from both the sides and the said Marriage Agreement was also produce before the Investigating Officer of the case during the investigation stage. On dated 27.01.2021, the petitioner No.2 delivered a baby girl, who is still with the petitioner No.2.

The petitioner No.1 is the informant of this case, and he does not want to pursue the matter further, since the petitioner Nos.2 and 3 were now staying together as a husband & wife and living peacefully with their minor daughter. However, the Section under which the petitioner No.3 is charge-sheeted is non-compoundable offence and thus, the ma