Subsequent marriage and family formation can quash criminal proceedings under POCSO Act, but compromise in sexual offence cases is not permissible.

JUDGMENT :

Rajeev Misra, J.

1. Heard Mr. Chandra Jeet Yadav, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. State opposite party 1 and Mr. Shashi Dhar Shukla, the learned counsel represented first informant opposite party 2.

2. Perused the record.

3. Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for appellants in court today is taken on record.

4. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by applicant, Indra Jeet (Chargesheeted accused) and Sanju (the prosecutrix) with the prayer to quash the proceeding of Sessions Case No. 547 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime No. 78 of 2020, State Vs. Indrajeet, Police Station-Mahuli, District-Sant Kabir Nagar, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 504 , 506 IPC , read with Section 5/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act , Police Station-Mahuli, District Sant Kabir Nagar pending before Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Sant Kabir Nagar.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that though applicant 1, Indra Jeet is a named and charge-sheeted accused and is also facing trial before court below by means of aforementioned Sessions Trial, however, in view of the subsequent developments that have emerged on record, the impugned criminal proceedings cannot be sustained. In furtherance of the aforesaid submission, the learned counsel for applicant submits that subsequent to the F.I.R. dated 23.3.2020 lodged by first informant, opposite party no.2, Smt. Gyanmati Devi (mother of the prosecutrix) the prosecutrix i.e. Sarju solemnized marriage with applicant-1. Consequently, the prosecutrix is now the legally weeded wife of applicant. By reason of above, prosecutrix is residing with the applicant as his legally weeded wife. From the cohabitation of applicant and the prosecutrix two male children were born. The bona fidie of the prosecutrix is explict from the fact that the prosecutrix has joined the present application inasmuch as she is a party to the application and furthermore a joint affidavit has also been filed by both the applicants in support of this application.

6. It is further contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the parties have also applied for registration of their marriage in terms of the U.P. Registration of Marriage Rule, 2017. Copy of the application form for registration is on record at page 6 of the supplementary affidavit.

7. On the above premise, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that in view of subsequent development that have taken place, the criminality, if any, committed by applicant 1 shall stand washed off. As such, no useful purpose shall be served in prolonging the criminal prosecution of applicant 1. In case the criminal prosecution of applicant 1 is allowed to continue, a happy family shall stand broken. He, therefore, submits that in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, as noticed above the present application is liable to be allowed.

8. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel representing first informant, opposite party 2 have vehemently opposed the present application. They submits that since the prosecutrix was a child within the meaning of the term 'child' as defined in POCSO Act on the date of occurrence, therefore, the subsequent development, if any, will not wipe out the criminality committed by applicants. To substantiate his submission, he referred to the decision given by the Supreme Court in Rampal Vs. State of Haryana, AIR online 2019 SC 1716 in which it has been held that no compromise can be entertained in matters relating to rape and sexual assault.

9. Reference was also made to the judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Kerala Vs. Hafsal Rahman N.R., Special Leave Petition (Criminal) Diary Nos. 24362 of 2021 wherein the Apex Court has held that there can be no compromise in matter arising out of the POCSO Act.

10. On the above edfic it is thus urged by the learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel representing first informant/opposite pa