Can't Quash POCSO Act Offence On The Basis Of Compromise/ Matrimony Between Accused & Victim: Punjab & Haryana High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that an offence under POCSO Act, which is a special statute, cannot be quashed on the basis of any compromise or matrimony between the accused and the prosecutrix.

The bench of Justice Suvir Sehgal also stressed that the subsequent marriage of the accused with the prosecutrix/victim would not dilute the offence under POCSO Act or under Section 376, IPC.

"Subsequent marriage of the accused with the prosecutrix would not dilute the offence under POCSO Act or under Section 376, IPC. POCSO Act has been incorporated with the objective of protecting children from offences of sexual assault, sexual harassment, pornography. If an accused is absolved of committing sexual excesses with a minor on the basis of settlement with victim on her attaining majority, this would encourage an unhealthy trend and defeat the objective and spirit behind the legislation of POCSO Act. Consequently, offence under POCSO Act, which is a special statue, cannot be quashed on the basis of any compromise or matrimony between the accused and the prosecutrix," the High Court Observed.

This observation of the Punjab and Haryana High Court assumes significance as recently some of the High Court of the country have quashed POCSO Act Case on the basis of compromise/matrimony between the victim and the accused.

Recently, the Meghalaya High Court, while quashing a POCSO FIR against a minor's partner, reiterated that rigors of the Act may not be applied to break down a happy family relationship. Such cases must be decided by taking a sympathetic view towards the accused, who is in a consensual relationship with the minor, in the instant case almost 18 years of age.

Read more about the case here: POCSO Act Not Meant To Breakdown Happy Family Relationship: Meghalaya High Court Quashes Proceedings Against Minor's Partner

In March 2022 also, the Meghalaya High Court quashed FIR and criminal proceedings in a POCSO case registered against a man as it noted that the accused man and victim-wife were living with each other as husband and wife, and out of the said union, a child was born.

The Bench of Justice W. Diengdoh however stressed that such cases of consensual or voluntary sexual intercourse with an underage girl by an adult man while they are living as husbands and where the wife gives birth to a child, are complex.

Similarly, the Karnataka High Court last month quashed a rape complaint registered against an accused after he married the prosecutrix during the pendency of the proceedings and produced adequate documents in that regard.

Read more about the case here: Karnataka High Court Quashes POCSO Case After Prosecutrix Admits Consensual Relationship, Marries Accused On Attaining Majority

Recently, the Allahabad High Court quashed an FIR and criminal proceedings in a POCSO case registered against a man as it noted that the accused man and victim-wife (who was a minor at the time of the incident) married the applicant/accused out of her own sweet will and is living a happy married life with him.

"To punish the offenders for a crime, involved in the present case, is in the interest of society, but, at the same time, the husband is taking care of his wife and in case, the husband is convicted and sentenced for societal interest, then, the wife will be in great trouble and their future would be ruined. It is also in the interest of society to settle and resettle the family for their welfare," the bench of Justice Manju Rani Chauhan observed as it quashed the rape-POCSO case against the accused.

Read more about the case here: "If Husband/Accused Is Convicted Then Victim/Wife's Future Would Be Ruined" : Allahabad High Court Quashes POCSO Case

The case before the Punjab and Haryana High Court

Accused Nardeep Singh Cheema has been booked under Sections 363, 376, and 366-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. He allegedly enticed away a minor girl and subsequently married her.

Thereafter, he moved the instant petition under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking to quash the FIR. He also filed a deed in his plea indicating that the minor girl, as well as her father-complainant, have executed affidavits, reflecting a compromise between the parties.

It was further submitted the married couple is living together and their statements have been recorded in support of the compromise. 

However, the state argued that the victim was admittedly a minor when she was enticed and has been recovered from the custody of the accused petitioner and that she was  Material placed on the record by the State shows that she has been subjected to sexual assault by the petitioner.

In view of this, refusing to quash the case, the Court dismissed the plea.

Case title - Nardeep Singh Cheema @ Navdeep Singh Cheema v. State of Punjab and others [CRM-M-2270-2020]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 257

Click Here To Read/Download Order