The court can quash non-compoundable criminal proceedings under exceptional circumstances based on subsequent developments, balancing justice, compassion, and the welfare of family.

O R D E R

The present Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in Spl.S.C.No.20 of 2023, on the file of the Sessions Court, Fast Track, Mahila Court, Dharmapuri, on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties.

2. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

3. Based on the complaint given by the de facto complainant/R2, a case in Crime No.128 of 2022 was registered on the file of the first respondent Police for “Girl Missing” and later, it was altered to one under Sections 363 & 366 of IPC and Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act , 2006, Section 5 (1) r/w 6(1) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act , 2012. After completion of investigation, the impugned charge sheet was filed before the Sessions Court, Fast Track, Mahila Court, Dharmapuri, and the Court took cognizance of the case and numbered it as Spl.S.C.No.20 of 2023.

4. The submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner are as follows:-

4.1. The petitioner and the 2^nd respondent’s daughter/victim are known to each other and there was a consensual relationship between them. Since their relationship was opposed by their parents, the victim, on her own volition, went along with the petitioner. Consequently, based on the complaint given by the second respondent, the mother of the victim, the present case came to be registered.

4.2. While so, the victim became pregnant and gave birth to a female child on 17.02.2024. After the victim attained majority, the petitioner and the victim got their marriage solemnized on 19.02.2026. As on date, the petitioner and the victim are living together as husband and wife. Their marriage has also been registered before the District Registrar’s Office, Coimbatore, on 20.02.2026.

4.3. The parties have entered into a compromise. In view of the settlement between the petitioner and the victim, no useful purpose would be served by permitting the impugned proceedings to continue. Hence, the impugned proceedings may be quashed on the ground of compromise. Affidavits and Joint Memo of Compromise to that effect have also been filed by the petitioner as well as the second respondent and the victim.

5. The petitioner and the victim, along with their child, appeared before this Court and they were identified by their respective counsel as well as by Mr.C.Selvam, SSI, Mathikon Palayam Police Station, Dharmapuri.

6. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the petitioner and the victim have been living together as husband and wife with their child.

7. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing on behalf of the first respondent submitted that since the victim is a school going girl, the de facto complainant/R2, the mother of the victim, did not accept their marriage. He further submitted that though the parties have entered into a compromise while this case is pending, this Court, taking into account the seriousness of the offences, has to consider the issue as to whether offences of this nature can be quashed on the ground of compromise between parties.

8. The main issue that requires the consideration of this Court is as to whether this Court can quash the criminal proceedings involving non-

compoundable offences pending against the petitioner.

9. The Supreme Court, in a very recent judgment in K.

Kirubakaran vs. State of Tamil Nadu [ 2025 INSC 1272 ], in which the appellant was convicted for the offences under Sections 366 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, pursuant to the compromise entered into between the parties, by commencing the judgment with the quote “The final cause o