Serial No. 02 Daily List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Crl.Petn. No. 21 of 2026 Date of order: 07.05.2026

1. Biangbor Rynjah alias Eric

2. Smti XYZ .....Petitioners - versus -

1. State of Meghalaya, represented by the Secretary to the Government of Meghalaya, Home (Police) Department, Meghalaya.

2. Shri Bokkhraw Songthiang ....Respondents Coram:

Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Revati Mohite Dere, Chief Justice Appearance:

For the Petitioners :Mr M.F. Qureshi, Adv. with Ms D. Pohsnem, Adv.

For the Respondents :Mr S. Sengupta, Addl PP with Mrs S. Laloo, GA i) Whether approved for No reporting in Law journals etc.:

ii) Whether approved for publication Yes in press:

JUDGMENT: (Oral)

Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.

2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith with the consent of the parties and the aforesaid petition is taken up for final disposal.

3. By this petition, the petitioners, i.e., the petitioner No. 1(accused) and the petitioner No. 2 (victim) seek quashing of the FIR vide P.S. Case No. 15 (2) of 2021 registered with the Madanrting Police Station for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 4, 6 and 17 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and consequently, the proceeding pending before the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Shillong. Quashing is sought on the premise that the petitioners are married and have three children.

4. A few facts giving rise to the filing of the aforesaid petition are as under:

The petitioner No. 2 was a minor at the relevant time and the petitioner No. 1 was a major. According to the petitioners, they were in a consensual physical relationship as they were in love with each other. It appears that after the petitioner No. 2 became pregnant and the same came to be known, the village head filed an FIR as against the petitioner No. 1, since the petitioner No. 2 was a minor at the relevant time. It further appears that after the petitioner No. 2 attained the age of majority, the parties i.e., the petitioner No. 1 and the petitioner No. 2 got married as per the prevalent customs. They further solemnised their marriage before the Parish Priest of Good Shepherd Parish, Jongksha, Meghalaya. The petitioners have three children, one aged 4 years, who is presently studying in Nursery, another son aged 2 years 4 months and a daughter, who is 4 months old. To the petition are annexed the copies of certificates of Baptism of the children.

5. This Court vide order dated 9th April, 2026, had directed the parties to appear before the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee to enable her to submit her report whether the consent given by the petitioner No. 2 was an informed consent and whether what was stated in the petition was correct; whether the petitioner No. 2 has received any benefit from any schemes, either under the State or Central Government etc. Pursuant thereto, the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee has submitted her report dated 17th April, 2026 in a sealed envelope. The envelope is opened and the report is perused.

6. On a perusal of the report, it appears that the parties could only speak in Khasi language; that the petitioners are living in a joint family in the house belonging of the petitioner No. 2’s mother alongwith their two sons and one daughter. It further appears from the report that the petitioner No. 1 and petitioner No. 2 are formally married in the Church in April, 2025, in the presence of the families of both sides. In the report, it is stated that the petitioner No. 1 is working as a carpenter and earns about 9000/- per month and that he contributes to the household expenditure and takes care of the personal expenditure of the petitioner No. 2 and their children. The petitioner No. 1 has assured to continue to take care of them. According to the report, the petitioner No. 2 disclosed that she has no objection to the quashing of the proceeding in view of their marriage and children, as she was in a relationship with the petitioner No. 1 voluntarily, out of love. It further appear