Back
2025 Supreme(All) 3306
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
RAJEEV MISRA, J.
Mukesh Ram – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others – Respondent
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 35524 of 2024
Decided on : 05-02-2025
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences
Act Referred
INDIAN PENAL CODE: S.363, S.366, S.376(2)(n)
PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT: S.5, S.6
Headnote
(B) Legal implications of marriage to a prosecutrix post-offence - The court recognized that post-offence developments, particularly marriage, can result in quashing of proceedings if deemed to protect family integrity. (Paras 10, 11)
Facts of the case:
The applicant, charged under specified sections, sought to quash the FIR and charge sheet as the prosecutrix became his wife after the FIR was filed. A son was born to them, signaling a significant change in circumstances.
Findings of Court:
The court allowed the application, quashing the entire criminal proceedings based on the marital relationship established after the FIR.
Issues: The court considered whether the marriage and subsequent family developments absolved the applicant of criminality despite the prosecutrix being a minor at the time of offence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the subsequent marriage and cohabitation rendered prosecution unnecessary, emphasizing the importance of preserving family integrity.
Result: Application allowed; proceedings quashed.
For the Applicant : Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. criminal proceedings initiated by fir. (Para 4 , 6 , 9) |
| 2. arguments regarding impact on family and prosecution. (Para 5 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. court's analysis of marriage's implications. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 4. supreme court citation on similar case. (Para 12) |
| 5. application allowed and proceedings quashed. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
JUDGMENT :
Rajeev Misra, J.
1. Heard Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. appearing for State.
2. An affidavit of compliance filed by the learned A.G.A. in Court today, is taken on record.
3. Perused the record.
4. Applicant-Mukesh Ram, who is a charge sheeted accused has approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the following prayers:-
"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned cognizance order dated 06.03.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Chandauli and impugned charge sheet dated 25.02.2023 as well as entire criminal proceedings of Special Trial No. 245 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 43 of 2023, under Sections 363 , 366, 376(2)(n) I.P.C. and Section 5 (J)/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Chandauli, District Chandauli, pending before the Court of learned special Judge, POCSO Act, Chandauli.
It is, further prayed that this Honb'le Court may kindly be pleased to stay the further proceedings of special Trial No. 245 of 2023, pending before the court of learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Chandauli, during the pendency of present application before this Hon'ble Court, and/or may pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case."
5. At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. submits that notice of this application has been served upon first informant-opposite party No. 2 on 17.01.2025. However, in spite of service of notice neither any counter affidavit has been filed by first informant-opposite party no. 2 in opposition to this application nor anyone has put in appearance on his behalf to oppose this application even in revised call.
6. Learned counsel for applicant submits that though applicant is a named and charge sheeted accused and facing trial before court below in above mentioned sessions trial, however in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case as have emerged on record, the present application is liable to be allowed by this Court. In furtherance of aforesaid submission, the learned counsel for applicant contends that first informant-opposite party no. 2, Mohd. Israil (Father of the prosecutrix) lodged an F.I.R. dated 09.02.2023, which was registered as Case Crime No. 0043 of 2023, under Section 366 , 363, 376(2)(n) I.P.C. and section 5(J)/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Chandauli, District Chandauli. In the aforesaid F.I.R., applicant, Mukesh Ram, has been nominated as solitary named accused. After aforementioned F.I.R. was lodged the prosecutrix solemnized marriage with applicant. As such the prosecutrix is the wife of applicant. By reason of above, the prosecutrix started residing with applicant as his wife. In view of the cohabilitation of the prosecutrix and applicant as husband and wife a son namely, Sagar was born on 28.06.2023. The birth certificate of the child has been brought on record and is at page 93 of the paper book. As per the said certificate, the applicant is shown as the father whereas the prosecutrix is shown as the mother.
7. On the above premise, the learned counsel for applicant contends that criminality, if any, committed by applicant now stands washed off. It is thus submitted by the learned counsel for applicant that no good ground now exists to prolong the criminal prosecution of applicant. In case the criminal prosecution of applicant is allowed to continue, a happy family shall stand broken. He therefore submits that present application
