Uttarakhand High Court POCSO news: The Uttarakhand High Court has quashed a criminal trial and related Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act proceedings against a man who subsequently married the alleged survivor, ruling that continuing the proceedings would disrupt a settled family unit.

Justice Alok Mahra was dealing with a plea of a man accused under the provisions of the POCSO Act seeking to quash the chargesheet, cognisance order, and the entire proceeding, which was pending in the session court.

“Continuation of the present proceedings would result in disruption of the settled family unit and would not be in the interest of justice, warranting interference by this court,” the court said on April 1.

Justice Mahra further noted that the court cannot shut its eyes to the ground reality when parties have established a settled matrimonial life, have had a child, and are living together peacefully.

The case originated from an FIR alleging that the applicant had enticed away a minor girl from her lawful guardianship. Following an investigation, a chargesheet was submitted, leading to a special session trial in the court of a special session judge (POCSO Act).

During the pendency of the legal proceedings, the applicant and the survivor solemnised their marriage, which was duly registered under the Uniform Civil Code in 2022.

The minor survivor maintained in statements to investigators that she had been accompanied by the applicant of her own free will without any coercion.

The parties approached the high court seeking to quash the proceedings based on an amicable settlement. Both the applicant and the respondent filed the affidavits affirming they had resolved their difference.

The court noted that it is jointly submitted by the parties that the dispute between them has been amicably settled and they have resolved all their differences.

The court referred to the Supreme Court judgements in similar matters, which held that where the parties have subsequently solemnised marriage, are blessed with children, and are leading a settled matrimonial life, the criminal proceedings arising out of offences under the POCSO Act may be set aside to do complete justice, observing that the court cannot shut its eyes to the ground reality and disturb a happy family life.

Acknowledging that the survivor was a minor at the time of the alleged incident, the order added that it is an admitted position that the parties have since married, have a child, and are living together peacefully.

Recently, while expressing concern over the lack of social and financial support provided by the state to a minor survivor who gave birth to a child, the Calcutta High Court has reduced the prison sentence of a man convicted under the POCSO Act to the three and a half years he had served at the time.

A division bench of Justices Tirthankar Ghosh and Chaitali Chatterjee was dealing with a plea of a man challenging his trial court’s conviction order.

“While it is the duty of the state to ensure that no offender under the eye of law escapes and it is fact that the consent of a minor is no consent in the eye of law but at the same time we feel helpless to find that inspite of relevant provision of the POCSO Act the state has not proceeded to provide any social security to the survivor who is of tender age and has given birth to a child,” the court said on March 20.

Invoking the Supreme Court’s “Romeo-Juliet” jurisprudence, the Meghalaya High Court has held that criminal proceedings under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act may be quashed in exceptional cases involving consensual adolescent relationships, to prevent “manifest injustice” and secure the ends of justice.

Notably, the bench pointed to the “rigid application” of POCSO provisions in cases of consensual adolescent relationships, which could “lead to serious injustice”.

A bench of Chief Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice H S Thangkhiew clarified that while the POCSO Act remains a stringent child-protection law, courts cannot ignore the ground realities of teenage relationships that fall within the so-called “Romeo-Juliet” category.

This ruling came on a reference made to the division bench after a single judge expressed disagreement with an earlier order that had allowed quashing of a POCSO case based on consent.