State v. Deepak) and to quash the charge

"1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 16.01.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Ambedkar Nagar in POCSO Case No.24/2021 (State Vs. Deepak) and to quash the charge-sheet no.1 filed on

28.12.2020 in Case Crime No.0178/2020, under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC read with Section 3/4 POCSO Act lodged at Police Station Hanswar, District Ambedkar Nagar.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that due to annoyance the FIR was lodged by father of the alleged victim though no such offence has ever been committed by the applicant no.1. He added that the alleged victim (applicant no. 2) was major at the time of incident and she has performed marriage with applicant no.1 and they are living as husband and wife peacefully. He also added that the informant has stated before the trial court that the actual birth year of the alleged victim is 2001 though he has got it registered as 2003. He submitted that no fruitful purpose would be sub- served, if the criminal proceedings are allowed to go on against the applicant no. 1.

4. In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance on a judgement rendered in Vishwas Bhandari v. State of Punjab and another reported in (2021) 2 Supreme Court Cases 605, Criminal Appeal No.105 of 2021, dated

03.02.2021 and has placed reliance on paragraphs 9 and 10 and the same 2 A482 No. 1457 of 2021 are extracted hereunder:- "9. We find that the evidence of the prosecutrix and the complainant before the Court shows that there is no allegation whatsoever against the appellant. The main allegation was against Vikram Roop Rai but the prosecutrix married him on 4.8.2013 and had given birth to two children from that wedlock. In the absence of any allegation against the appellant, we find that the continuation of proceedings against him is nothing but an abuse of process of law.

10. Since there is no evidence against the appellant, the proceedings initiated against him on the basis of FIR would be untenable. The High Court was, thus, not justified in dismissing the petition against the appellant."

5. Learned AGA for the State has though opposed application on merit but he has no objection if the parties have performed marriage being major at the time of incident.

6. In view of aforesaid, let both the applicants appear before this Court on

18.09.2025 at 2.15 p.m.

7. List/put up this matter on 18.09.2025 at 2.15 p.m.

8. Till the next date of listing, the further proceeding of POCSO Case No.24/2021 (State Vs. Deepak), arising out of Case Crime No.0178/2020, under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC read with Section 3/4 POCSO Act lodged at Police Station Hanswar, District Ambedkar Nagar, shall remain stayed." In compliance of the order aforesaid, both the applicants, namely, Deepak and Anjani are present before this Court. They are identified by their counsel. On a query being asked, Anjani (victim) replied that she was major at the time of incident and she has performed marriage with applicant no. 1, namely, Deepak and there is also one year's child out of their wedlock and she is residing peacefully with him and she submits that the criminal proceeding has been initiated by her father under anguish. Deepak, applicant no. 1, who is present in Court, on being asked, has reiterated the same statement, as was accorded before this Court, by the alleged victim. Learned counsel for the parties have jointly prayed that opposite 3 A482 No. 1457 of 2021 party no. 2/complainant, while given the statement before the learned trial court as PW-2, has not supported the version of the prosecution and he has been declared hostile. He added that no fruitful purpose would be sub-served in allowing the criminal proceedings against the applicant no. 1, thus, submission is that the criminal proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 178 of 2020 may be quashed. In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance on a judgement rendered in Vishwas Bhandari v. State of Punjab and another reported in (2021) 2 Supreme Court Cases 605, Criminal Appeal No.105 of 2021, dated 03.02.2021 and submits that the case of the present applicants is squarely covered with the ratio of the Judgment aforesaid. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid but he has no objection, if the parties have performed the marriage and there is one year's child out of their wedlock. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it transpires that the First Information Report was lodged by the father of the victim, though he has been declared hostile before the trial court and he didn't support the prosecution story. This Court has also noticed that the statement has been given by the prosecutrix as well as applicant no. 1 before this Court that they have performed the marriage and they are living as husband and wife; peacefully and there is also one year's child out of their wedlock. It is also noticeable that after the aforesaid statements and facts of the case, if the criminal proceedings are allowed against the applicants, the alleged prosecutrix will again face trauma. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed. Resultantly, the criminal proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 178 of 2020, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Hanswar, District Ambedkar Nagar, are hereby quashed. Consequences to be followed. 4 A482 No. 1457 of 2021 Personal appearance of both the applicants, is hereby exempted. September 18, 2025 kkv/ (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

"1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 16.01.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Ambedkar Nagar in POCSO Case No.24/2021 (State Vs. Deepak) and to quash the charge-sheet no.1 filed on

28.12.2020 in Case Crime No.0178/2020, under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC read with Section 3/4 POCSO Act lodged at Police Station Hanswar, District Ambedkar Nagar.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that due to annoyance the FIR was lodged by father of the alleged victim though no such offence has ever been committed by the applicant no.1. He added that the alleged victim (applicant no. 2) was major at the time of incident and she has performed marriage with applicant no.1 and they are living as husband and wife peacefully. He also added that the informant has stated before the trial court that the actual birth year of the alleged victim is 2001 though he has got it registered as 2003. He submitted that no fruitful purpose would be sub- served, if the criminal proceedings are allowed to go on against the applicant no. 1.

4. In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance on a judgement rendered in Vishwas Bhandari v. State of Punjab and another reported in (2021) 2 Supreme Court Cases 605, Criminal Appeal No.105 of 2021, dated

03.02.2021 and has placed reliance on paragraphs 9 and 10 and the same 2 A482 No. 1457 of 2021 are extracted hereunder:- "9. We find that the evidence of the prosecutrix and the complainant before the Court shows that there is no allegation whatsoever against the appellant. The main allegation was against Vikram Roop Rai but the prosecutrix married him on 4.8.2013 and had given birth to two children from that wedlock. In the absence of any allegation against the appellant, we find that the continuation of proceedings against him is nothing but an abuse of process of law.

10. Since there is no evidence against the appellant, the proceedings initiated against him on the basis of FIR would be untenable. The High Court was, thus, not justified in dismissing the petition against the appellant."

5. Learned AGA for the State has though opposed application on merit but he has no objection if the parties have performed marriage being major at the time of incident.

6. In view of aforesaid, let both the applicants appear before this Court on

18.09.2025 at 2.15 p.m.

7. List/put up this matter on 18.09.2025 at 2.15 p.m.

8. Till the next date of listing, the further proceeding of POCSO Case No.24/2021 (State Vs. Deepak), arising out of Case Crime No.0178/2020, under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC read with Section 3/4 POCSO Act lodged at Police Station Hanswar, District Ambedkar Nagar, shall remain stayed." In compliance of the order aforesaid, both the applicants, namely, Deepak and Anjani are present before this Court. They are identified by their counsel. On a query being asked, Anjani (victim) replied that she was major at the time of incident and she has performed marriage with applicant no. 1, namely, Deepak and there is also one year's child out of their wedlock and she is residing peacefully with him and she submits that the criminal proceeding has been initiated by her father under anguish. Deepak, applicant no. 1, who is present in Court, on being asked, has reiterated the same statement, as was accorded before this Court, by the alleged victim. Learned counsel for the parties have jointly prayed that opposite 3 A482 No. 1457 of 2021 party no. 2/complainant, while given the statement before the learned trial court as PW-2, has not supported the version of the prosecution and he has been declared hostile. He added that no fruitful purpose would be sub-served in allowing the criminal proceedings against the applicant no. 1, thus, submission is that the criminal proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 178 of 2020 may be quashed. In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance on a judgement rendered in Vishwas Bhandari v. State of Punjab and another reported in (2021) 2 Supreme Court Cases 605, Criminal Appeal No.105 of 2021, dated 03.02.2021 and submits that the case of the present applicants is squarely covered with the ratio of the Judgment aforesaid. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid but he has no objection, if the parties have performed the marriage and there is one year's child out of their wedlock. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it transpires that the First Information Report was lodged by the father of the victim, though he has been declared hostile before the trial court and he didn't support the prosecution story. This Court has also noticed that the statement has been given by the prosecutrix as well as applicant no. 1 before this Court that they have performed the marriage and they are living as husband and wife; peacefully and there is also one year's child out of their wedlock. It is also noticeable that after the aforesaid statements and facts of the case, if the criminal proceedings are allowed against the applicants, the alleged prosecutrix will again face trauma. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed. Resultantly, the criminal proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 178 of 2020, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Hanswar, District Ambedkar Nagar, are hereby quashed. Consequences to be followed. 4 A482 No. 1457 of 2021 Personal appearance of both the applicants, is hereby exempted. September 18, 2025 kkv/ (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench