The High Court may quash proceedings under inherent powers if a victim and offender marry post-allegation, promoting justice and familial stability despite non-compoundable offences.

JUDGMENT :

Savitri Ratho, J.

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner who is the accused in C.T. (Special) Case No. 34 of 2019, arising out of Tumusingha P.S. Case No. 56 of 2019, pending in the Court of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge -cum- Special Court under POCSO Act, Dhenkanal for quashing the criminal proceeding.

2. The prosecution case in brief as per the FIR lodged by opposite party No.2, father of the victim girl is that the petitioner had kidnapped his minor daughter on 25.05.2019 at about 9.00 pm, giving her the enticement of marriage. As he feared that her life was in danger, he searched for her and on 05.06.2019 at 6.00 a.m. learnt that her marriage was going to be solemnized and lodged FIR.

3. The police conducted investigation and examined the victim and other witnesses. The opposite party No.2 in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. had stated that he had lodged FIR as his daughter had gone away from the house on 25.05.2019 around 9.00 pm. As he could not find her, he lodged FIR against the petitioner on 05.06.2019 suspecting him to have kidnapped her daughter. In the same evening, his daughter was rescued from the house of his sister. She stated that on account of quarrel in the house, she had gone to her aunt’s house on 25.05.2019. This was corroborated by the statement of his wife and her sister. So final form dated 29.02.2020 had been submitted as FR Mistake of fact under Sections – 363/366 IPC and Section 12 of the POCSO Act.

4. On 24.04.2020, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum- Special Court under POCSO Act, Dhenkanal issued direction for further investigation by an officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police observing interalia that the minor victim had stated in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that the petitioner had taken her giving assurance of marriage and had married her.

5. On 13.05.2023, this CRLMC was listed before 2^nd National Lok Adalat. On that day, the petitioner, the opposite party no.2 and the victim were present in Court and the victim stated that she was a major and was staying with the accused as his legally married wife and leading a happy conjugal life. The opposite party No.2 her father, who is the informant had stated that he does not want to proceed with the case. The matter was directed to be listed before the Regular Bench as the offences were not compoundable.

6. Affidavit dated 05.05.2023 has been filed by opposite party No.2 annexing the marriage certificate dated 24.04.2023 of the petitioner and his daughter, issued by the Marriage Officer, Kamakhyanagar. It has been stated in the affidavit that his daughter has married the petitioner and neither he nor his relatives who are witnesses in the case intend to proceed further in the case and depose against the petitioner.

7. The victim has also filed an affidavit on 09.08.2023 stating that she and the petitioner have got married before the Marriage Officer and both are living happily and she does want to proceed with the case for which the proceedings may be quashed.

8. During pendency of this application, the learned State Counsel has informed that chargesheet dated 16.08.2023 has been filed against the petitioner for commission of offences punishable under Sections 363 , 366 of IPC read with Section 12 of POCSO Act. He has filed a copy of the chargesheet alongwith a Memo, which have been taken on record.

9. Mr. Prasanta Kumar Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and the victim (daughter of opposite party no.2) are staying together and leading a happy conjugal with their child