Quashing criminal proceedings is justifiable when the parties have reconciled and married, reflecting societal approval and rendering continuation of the trial an abuse of process.

JUDGMENT :

S.S. Mishra, J.

The petitioner has filed the present application under Section 528 of the BNSS , 2023 r/w Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., 1973, seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings arising out of Nayagarh P.S. Case No. 60 of 2022, corresponding to T.R. Case No. 135 of 2022, pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court under the POCSO Act, Nayagarh.

2. The prosecution case originates from an FIR lodged by the informant on 10.05.2022, alleging that on 09.05.2022, the petitioner kidnapped her minor daughter (Opposite Party No.3) and took away gold ornaments and cash of Rs.8,000/- from their house.

3. Based on these allegations, Nayagarh P.S. Case No. 60 of 2022 was registered under Sections 363 /366/376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ( IPC ) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act. Upon completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was filed, and the learned trial court took cognizance of the offences.

4. During the pendency of the trial, the petitioner and Opposite Party No.3 entered into a marital relationship after the latter attained the age of majority. They are now living together as husband and wife, and the informant (Opposite Party No.2) has expressed her willingness not to prosecute the matter further.

5. Mr. Tripathy, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the entire case was based on a love affair between the petitioner and Opposite Party No.3, which was opposed by their families due to religious differences. Consequently, both the petitioner and Opposite Party No.3 left their respective homes and later solemnized their marriage.

6. It is further submitted that at the time of the alleged incident, Opposite Party No.3 was a minor, and due to that, the police rescued her and handed over to her parents. However, upon attaining majority, she voluntarily married the petitioner, and they are now living together happily.

7. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that continuation of the criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose, as the alleged victim does not support the prosecution case, and the matter has been amicably resolved between the parties. Even all the family members of the Opposite Party No.3 after having agreed to the alliance, will not support prosecution case.

8. It is also submitted that the informant (Opposite Party No.2) has no objection to quash the proceedings and is ready to submit an affidavit before this Court stating the same.

9. Mr. Nayak, the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State of Odisha opposes the prayer for quashing on the ground that serious offences under Sections 376 (2)(n) IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act have been invoked against the petitioner.

10. Relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ramji Lal Bairwa & Another v. State of Rajasthan & Others, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3193 Mr. Nayak has contended that cases involving offences under the POCSO Act cannot be quashed merely on the basis of a compromise between the parties, as offences are considered to be the crimes against society at large and not just against an individual victim. He further submits that indulgence by this Court at this stage would cause defeat of the object of the POCSO Act.

11. Learned counsel for the State submits that even if the victim and her family do not wish to proceed with the case, the gravity of the offence and the legislative intent behind the POCSO Act necessitate that the trial be conducted in accordance with law.

12. The applicability of the principl