IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MMO No.993 of 2024 Reserved on : 24.12.2024 Decided on : 31.12.2024 Ganesh …Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : None.

For the respondents : Mr. H.S. Rawat and Mr.

Mohinder Zharaick, Additional Advocates General for respondent No.1.

Mr. Ashish Verma, Advocate for respondents No.3 and 4.

Virender Singh, Judge Petitioner has filed the present petition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), for quashing of FIR No.65 of 2023, dated 06.08.2023, (hereinafter referred to

1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

as the FIR, in question), registered with Police Station Tissa, District Chamba, H.P., under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPC’) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘POCSO Act’), as well as, proceedings resultant thereto, which are stated to be pending, before the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Chamba, H.P., in Sessions Trial No.10 of 2023.

2. The quashing has been sought, on the basis of the alleged compromise, which has taken place, between the petitioner and complainant, who is the child victim.

3. In the petition, apart from the child victim, guardian of the child victim and father of the accused have also been impleaded as respondents No.3 and 4.

4. Perusal of record shows that the FIR, in question, was lodged, on the basis of the statement, made by the child victim, upon which, the police has conducted the investigation and submitted the charge-sheet, against the petitioner, under Section 376 of IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

5. Now, the petitioner is before this Court, by way of present petition for quashing the FIR, in question.

6. In this factual background, the first and foremost question, which arises for determination, before this Court, is whether the petition, under Section 528 of BNSS, can be entertained, on the basis of the compromise. 7. The FIR, in question, is registered, under the special statute i.e. POCSO Act. The Legislature, in its wisdom, has enacted the special statute, i.e. POCSO Act, by keeping in view the rising number of cases, being committed against the children. Once, it has been held that the offences are against the State, then, it is the duty of the State to prosecute the offender, before the competent Court of law.

8. As observed earlier, the Legislature, in its wisdom, has enacted the POCSO Act, with an object to reduce the child abuse and protection of the children from sexual offences. The object of the Act has elaborately been discussed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Alakh Alok Srivastava versus Union of India and others, reported in 2018(7) SCALE 88. Relevant paras 10 to 12, 19 and 20 of the judgment, are reproduced, as under:

“10.The POCSO Act has been legislated keeping in view the fundamental concept under Article 15 of the Constitution that empowers the State to make special provisions for children and also Article 39(f) which provides that the State shall in particular direct its policy towards securing that the children are given opportunities and facilities to develop in a healthy manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity and that childhood and youth are protected against exploitation and against moral and material abandonment. The Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Act indicate the focus for reduction of child abuse and protection of children from the offences of sexual assault, sexual harassment and pornography, etc. The relevant part of the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the POCSO Act is extracted below:- “3. The data collected by the National Crime Records Bureau shows that there has been increase in cases of sexual offences against children. This is corroborated by the ‘Stud