Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Manjunatha, filed a criminal petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) seeking quashment of proceedings in Special Case No.242/2023 pending before the Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-1, Mysuru. The case was registered by Udayagiri Police, Mysuru, for offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n) (rape by a person in a position of trust) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), and Sections 5(L), 5(J)(II) (aggravated penetrative sexual assault) and 6 (punishment for aggravated penetrative sexual assault) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act). The complaint was lodged by respondent No.2, Meenakshi, the mother of the victim, alleging that the petitioner and her daughter were in love and that the petitioner had committed sexual assault on the minor victim. During the pendency of the proceedings, the victim and the petitioner got married and were living together happily. The victim's mother, respondent No.2, filed an affidavit stating that she had no objection to the quashing of the proceedings. The petitioner, through his counsel Sri Rohith S.V., argued that since the parties had settled the dispute and the victim was now major, continuing the proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law. The State, represented by the High Court Government Pleader Sri Thejesh P., and the counsel for respondent No.2, Sri Nagaraju H.R., did not oppose the petition. The High Court, after hearing the parties, allowed the petition and quashed the entire proceedings in Special Case No.242/2023. The Court held that in the peculiar facts and circumstances, where the victim and accused had married and were living happily, and the victim's mother had no objection, quashing the proceedings would secure the future of the couple and prevent further abuse of the legal process.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Quashing of Proceedings - Section 482 CrPC - Compromise - The petitioner/accused sought quashment of proceedings in Special Case No.242/2023 for offences under Sections 376(2)(n), 506 IPC and Sections 5(L), 5(J)(II), 6 of POCSO Act, 2012, on the ground that the victim and accused had married and were living happily, and the victim's mother (respondent No.2) had no objection to quashing. The High Court, exercising inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC, allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings, holding that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of process of law and would ruin the future of the couple. (Paras 1-5) B) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Quashing of Proceedings - Sections 5(L), 5(J)(II), 6 - Compromise - The victim, a minor at the time of the incident, had married the accused and was living happily with him. The mother of the victim filed an affidavit stating she had no objection to quashing. The Court held that in the peculiar facts, where the parties have settled and the victim is now major, quashing the proceedings would serve the ends of justice. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether criminal proceedings under the POCSO Act and IPC can be quashed on the basis of a compromise between the accused and the victim's mother, where the victim and accused have married and are living together happily.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The entire proceedings in Special Case No.242/2023 pending on the file of Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-1, Mysuru, for offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 506 of IPC and Sections 5(L), 5(J)(II), 6 of POCSO Act, 2012, are quashed.
Law Points
- Compromise in POCSO cases
- Quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC
- Inherent powers of High Court
- Settlement between parties
- Marriage between accused and victim
