SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Megh) 232

HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG


Crl.Petn.No.126/2026


Date of order: 15.09.2026


Shri Sunil Sangma .... Petitioners

Vs

1. State of Meghalaya, represented by the Commissioner & Secretary, Home (Police) Department.

2. Mrs. C (complainant) in Sadar PS Case No.274(11) 2017, now registered as Special (POCSO) Case No.16/2025 (through its Investigating Officer Inspector C.M. Sangma, Sadar Police Station, Shillong, Meghalaya).

3. Miss. X (victim) in Sadar PS Case No.274(11) 2017, now registered as Special (POCSO) Case No.16/2025 (through its Investigating Officer Inspector C.M. Sangma, Sadar Police Station, Shillong, Meghalaya). ..... Respondents


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


Appearance:

For the Petitioner : Mr. S. Deb, LAC

For the Respondents : Mr. A.S. Dey, GA


(Revati Mohite Dere)


Chief Justice


“ 1 L M a 5 m e.0g D 9h. R a2l - 0a P y2 S a ”


Verified Signed On: 16-09-2026 14:34:06 IST

i) Whether approved for No reporting in Law journals etc.:

ii) Whether approved for publication No in press:

JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble, the Chief Justice) (Oral)

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

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

3. By this petition, preferred by the petitioner through the High Court Legal Services Committee, the petitioner seeks quashing of the FIR registered with the Sadar Police Station, being Sadar P.S. Case 274(11) of 2017, the chargesheet filed in the said case and consequently, the proceeding pending before the learned Special Judge (POCSO), East Khasi Hills District, Shillong, being Special POCSO Case No.16 of 2025.

4. Quashing is sought on the premise that the petitioner (original accused) and the respondent No.3 (survivor) are living together as husband and wife since 2017 and that from the said relationship have a child, who is currently eight years of age. It appears that at the relevant time when the offence took place, the petitioner was 18 years of age and the respondent No.3, 17 years 11 months and 27 days, three days shy of attaining the age of majority.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the relationship was a romantic relationship and that the parties i.e., the petitioner and the respondent No.3 have been living together as husband and wife since 2017.

6. Pursuant thereto, notice was issued to all the respondents.

7. The respondent Nos.2 and 3 were also directed to appear before the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee before the next date, so as to enable the Secretary to submit her report, as to whether the consent given by respondent Nos.2 and 3 was an informed consent and whether the respondent No.3 and her child has received any benefit under any of the Schemes either of the State or Central Government etc.

8. Learned GA was also requested to submit a report of the concerned police station, as to whether the contents of the petition were true and correct.

9. Pursuant thereto, Mr. Dey, learned GA has submitted the report of the concerned officer C.M. Sangma, attached to Women P.S., Shillong. The said report dated 15th September, 2026 is taken on record. From the said report, it appears that what is stated in the aforesaid petition is true and correct.

10. The Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee has also submitted her report in a sealed envelope. The envelope is open and the report dated 2nd September, 2026 is perused. From the said report, it appears that the respondent No.3 was in love with the petitioner and had physical relation with him out of her own free will. That pursuant thereto, she became pregnant in 2017 and gave birth to a son in December, 2017. She has stated that her son passed away within a month. From the report, it further appears that thereafter the respondent No.3 was again blessed with a daughter when the respondent No.3 was 18 years of age. The report reveals that the petitioner is taking care of the respondent No.3 and her child and that the respondent No.3 is working as a Cleaner at the Women’s College and earning about ₹10,000/- per month. The report further reveals that the respondent No.3 has not received any benefit under any of the Schemes either of the State or Central Government. The report further reveals that the respondent No.3 wants to open a shop in front of her house and if she receives some assistance/compensation, she will be able to do so. The report further reveals that that the respondent No.3 has completed Class-XI and does not wish to continue with her education and that she has no objection to the quashing of the FIR and consequently, the proceeding. From the report, it further appears that according to the respondent No.2 (complainant and mother of the respondent No.3 (survivor), the petitioner is taking good care of her daughter and she does not wish to proceed with the case.

11. Learned

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top