Can't quash offence under POCSO on basis of compromise: Punjab and Haryana HC

Saurabh Malik

Advertisement

Chandigarh, September 26

An offence under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act cannot be quashed on the basis of a compromise or matrimony between the accused and the prosecutrix, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled. The assertion by Justice Suvir Sehgal of the High Court came in a case where an accused, seeking the quashing of an FIR, submitted that he had married the girl after she attained majority.

Will encourage unhealthy trend

If an accused is absolved of committing sexual excesses with a minor on the basis of a settlement with the victim on her attaining majority, it will encourage an unhealthy trend and defeat the objective and spirit behind the legislation of the POCSO Act. Justice Suvir Sehgal

Referring to the marriage certificate, the petitioner’s counsel submitted that the girl and her complainant-father had executed affidavits, reflecting a compromise between the parties. The counsel submitted that the married couple was living together and their statements had been recorded in support of the compromise.

After hearing the contentions and going though the record, Justice Sehgal also made it clear that the subsequent marriage of the accused with the prosecutrix would not dilute the offence under the POCSO Act or under Section 376 (rape) of the IPC.

The Bench, during the course of the hearing, was told that the FIR was registered at the Dehlon police station in Ludhiana district on July 23, 2019, for kidnapping and other offences under Sections 363 and 366-A of the IPC. The offence of rape under Section 376 of the IPC and an offence under the provisions of the POCSO Act were added later.

Justice Sehgal added that the facts revealed that the prosecutrix was admittedly a minor when she was enticed and was recovered from the custody of the accused-petitioner. The material placed on record by the state showed that she had been subjected to a sexual assault by the petitioner.

Justice Sehgal observed that the POCSO Act had been incorporated with the objective of protecting children from offences of sexual assault, sexual harassment and pornography. “If an accused is absolved of committing sexual excesses with a minor on the basis of a settlement with the victim on her attaining majority, it will encourage an unhealthy trend and defeat the objective and spirit behind the legislation of the POCSO Act,” Justice Sehgal asserted.

Dismissing the plea, Justice Sehgal added an offence under the POCSO Act, which was a special statue, could not be quashed on the basis of a compromise or matrimony. As such, there was no merit in the prayer for quashing the FIR.