The court may quash criminal proceedings involving non-compoundable offences based on post-offence reconciliation, considering the unique facts and societal interests.

O R D E R

The present Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in Spl.S.C.No.264 of 2025, pending on the file of the Fast Track Mahila Court, Dharmapuri, on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the petitioners and the victim girl.

2. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

3. Based on the complaint given by the 2^nd respondent, a case in Crime No.15 of 2025 was registered on the file of the 1^st respondent/ Police against the petitioners and on completion of investigation, a final report was filed before the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases, under the POCSO Act, Dharmapuri and the same was made over to the Fast Track Mahila Court, Dharmapuri, for the offences under Sections 366 of the Indian Penal Code,1860, 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 and 5(l), 5(j)(ii), 6(1) and 21(1) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2019 and the same was taken on file in Spl.S.C.No.264 of 2025.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the case arises from a consensual relationship between the first petitioner and the victim girl/3rd respondent. He would submit that the petitioners and the victim girl hail from the same village and they were known to each other. He would submit that petitioners 2 and 3 are the parents of the 1^st petitioner and 4^th petitioner is the mother of the victim girl/3rd respondent; without understanding the consequences, to save the honour of the family, they had arranged the marriage of the first petitioner with the victim girl/3rd respondent. He would submit that based on the complaint given by the 2^nd respondent/ Rural Welfare Officer(Women), to the respondent police/R1, the case in Crime No.15 of 2025 was registered for the aforesaid offences. He would further submit that the victim girl attained majority, and their marriage has also been registered before the Sub-Registrar’s Office, Pennagaram on 13.02.2026. He would also submit that due to wedlock, they have got a male child and they are all living together happily. He would further submit that the parties have entered into a compromise and the victim girl has filed consent affidavit to that effect. Therefore, when the petitioners and the victim girl have compromised the matter, no useful purpose will be served by continuing the impugned proceedings. Hence, the impugned proceedings may be quashed on the ground of compromise.

5. The petitioners and the victim girl/R3 appeared before this Court and they were identified by their respective counsel as well as Ms.S.Kalpana, Sub Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Pennagaram, Dharmapuri District.

6. On being enquired by this Court, the victim girl stated that she has amicably settled the dispute with the petitioners and she is not willing to pursue the criminal proceedings and therefore, seeks to quash the same. 7. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the first respondent 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 petitioners.

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, p