Marriage after the alleged offence can lead to quashing of proceedings to promote family stability and justice.

ORDER

The petitioners are the accused in S.C No.1813/2023 on the files of the Fast Track Special Court, Varkala. The offence alleged against them are under Section 376 r/w Section 34 I.P.C, Section 4 r/w Section 3(a) and Section 6 r/w Section 5(j)(ii) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Sections 9 and 10 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act.

2. The prosecution case is that, the first petitioner married the second respondent/de facto complainant while she was only 17½ years of age, and indulged in penetrative sexual assault from 29.08.2022 onwards, as a result of which, the second respondent got impregnated. Petitioners 2 to 5, who are the close relatives of the first petitioner, are alleged to have made arrangements for the performance of the above child marriage, thereby enabling the first petitioner to resort to sexual assault upon the de facto complainant. The final report in this case has been filed by the Inspector of Police, Kadakkavoor before the Additional Sessions Court (Special Court for POCSO Act Cases), Thiruvananthapuram which was later on made over to the Fast Track Special Court, Varkala.

3. In the present petition, the petitioners would contend that a false case has been foisted against them. According to the petitioners, there was only an unofficial celebration of marriage conducted on 29.08.2022 as per the customary ceremonies since it was found inauspicious as per astrological advice, to conduct the marriage after the de facto complainant attaining the age of 18 years. It is further stated that the marriage of the first petitioner and the second respondent was so conducted, in accordance with the traditional customs being followed in the Kuruva community, to which the parties belonged. According to the petitioners, the first petitioner and the second respondent are now living a peaceful family life with the girl child born in their wedlock on 12.06.2023.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.

5. Annexure-A1 wedding invitation card is produced by the petitioners to show that the actual legal marriage between the first petitioner and the second respondent was conducted only on 18.02.2023, after the second respondent had attained the age of majority. Annexure-A2 marriage certificate issued by the Local Registrar of Marriages, Kadakkavoor Grama Panchayat, would reveal that the above marriage was lawfully registered on 22.02.2023. Further, the petitioners have produced the photograph of the first petitioner and the second respondent with their daughter born in their wedlock, to show that they have been leading a peaceful married life.

6. The issue whether a crime of aggravated penetrative sexual assault registered against an offender under the provisions of the POCSO Act could be quashed taking note of the marriage of the victim with the accused, still remains as a delicate and debatable subject matter among judicial circles. A learned Single Judge of this Court had the occasion to deal with two such similar issues in Crl.M.C.Nos.6880/2022 & 7427/2024. Relying on various judicial precedents of several High Courts as well as this Court on the point, the learned Single Judge culled out seven aspects of significance to be looked into in cases of this nature. Paragraph No.26 of the common order rendered by the learned Single Judge inx xxx v. State of Kerala [ 2025 KHC 471 ] is extracted hereunder:

“The following aspects assume significance in the peculiar nature of the cases, where the offence is followed by the marriage between the perpetrator and the victim:

(1) Unless the criminal proceedings are terminated by quashing the same, there will be utter chaos, confusion and even havoc in the life of the victim who married the accused, and who is leading a happy life. In other words, the life of the victim, the accused and the child, if any, in that relationship will be ruined. Per contra, If the offence is quashed, it