Criminal proceedings under POCSO and IPC may be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. if evidence proves the victim was a major at the time of the alleged offence and the parties have since entered into a stable marriage, rendering further prosecution redundant.

O R D E R

1. Leave granted.

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant, learned counsel appearing for the State and learned counsel appearing for the second and third respondents.

3. The second respondent is the first informant at whose instance, a First Information Report was registered on 18th September, 2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 3 54A , 363, 366, 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (for short, ‘POCSO Act’). The third respondent is the victim of the offence. As can be seen from the allegations in the First Information Report (FIR), the alleged incident is of September, 2016. In the FIR, the second respondent has alleged that the age of the victim was 17 years.

4. Our attention was invited to the marriage certificate issued by the Registrar of Hindu Marriages and Sub Registrar, Varanasi which records that the marriage between the appellant and third respondent has been solemnized on 5th December, 2016. The date of birth of the third respondent – victim is shown therein as 20th July, 1998. It is also brought on record that from the wedlock between the appellant and the third respondent, two children have been born whose documents have been produced along with Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.10906 of 2025.

5. On the last date, we had directed learned counsel appearing for the State to get the marriage certificate relied upon by the parties duly verified. Accordingly, an affidavit has been filed by Dr. Atul Tripathi, ACP, Sarnath in which it is stated that the marriage certificate has been verified and it is found to be genuine and in fact a true copy thereof has been produced along with the affidavit.

6. Our attention is invited to the affidavit filed by the third respondent in which she has accepted the fact that she is happily married to the appellant and they have been residing together. She has disclosed her date of birth as 20th July, 1998. In the record of the Primary School, as can be seen from document at Annexure ‘P-1’, the date of birth of the third respondent is shown as 20th July, 1998. Ossification test was conducted during the investigation. The report of the test is that on the date of commission of the offence, the age of the third respondent may be between 17 ½ years to 19 years. There are documents on record to show that the date of birth of the third respondent was 20th July, 1998. Therefore, when the offence was allegedly committed in September, 2016 she was already a major.

7. Now that the appellant and third respondent are happily married, no purpose will be served by continuing the prosecution as it will cause undue harassment to the appellant, the third respondent and their children.

8. Coming to the impugned order, we find that the marriage certificate was placed on record before the High Court. In fact, no objection by the first informant is also recorded in the impugned order. Surprisingly, the High Court instead of entertaining the petition for quashing on the ground of settlement, has observed that the application for dropping criminal proceedings on the basis compromise may be moved before the Trial Court. The High Court completely lost sight of the fact that the Trial Court could not have recorded the settlement and in fact, this was a fit case for the High Court to have exercised its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. by quashing the proceedings. Unnecessarily, the parties have been forced to come to this Court.

9. The impugned order is set aside. FIR No.567 of 2016 registered with Cholapur Police Station, District Varanasi and proceedings