POCSO Act cases cannot be quashed on ground of compromise between accused and complainant: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court recently observed that cases involving heinous offences such as rape and molestation of minors under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, cannot be quashed merely because the accused and complainant have entered into a compromise [Om Prakash v State]..Single-judge Justice JJ Munir observed that survivors do not have the freedom to compromise with the accused in such cases as if they were a compoundable offences or based on civil cause."In heinous offences such as rape and molestation of minors, which are punishable under the Act of 2012, the victims do not have the freedom to compromise as if it were a compoundable offence or a civil cause," the Court said.Therefore, a plea which sought quashing of proceedings on the ground that the accused and the complainant were now married to each other, was rejected by the Court."An offence of rape or one under Section 7/8 of the Act of 2012 is an offence against the society, the truth of which has to be established before a Court of competent jurisdiction on the basis of whatever evidence is led at the trial," the Court noted.The accused may be acquitted if the charge is not proved, or if proved, he would be convicted. "The purpose is not to persecute the accused nor is it to let him off, because his relations with the complainant has taken a happier turn," the Court made it clear..In the present case, a first information report (FIR) was lodged by the survivor, a widow, in 2020 alleging that she became friends with the applicant-accused, Om Prakash, who held out a false promise to marry her. On the basis of that promise, he had carnal relations with her and also molested her minor daughter with questionable intentions.As a result, an FIR was lodged and the accused was booked for rape and molestation and other offences under the Indian Penal Code and also for offences under the POCSO Act for offences against the complainant's daughter.The complainant supported her case before the Magistrate in her statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Further, the allegations of rape and molestation was also supported by her daughter..In August 2021, the complainant and the accused got married according to Hindu rites and therefore, she moved an application before the special judge stating that she does not want to pursue the prosecution and that the case should be disposed of on the basis of the compromise.The accused then moved the High Court for quashing of the case.The counsel for the accused said that if the case proceeds then no useful purpose would be served and the same would be an abuse of process of Court. Therefore, the present application to quash proceeding was sought..The Court observed that the State is the forerunner of the prosecution and it is the State which has to pursue the prosecution and take it to its logical conclusion. The endeavour of the Court in a matter involving such a heinous offence is to determine the truth of the allegations, said the single-judge. "In any eventuality, in a matter like the present one, this Court cannot interdict the prosecution and quash proceedings for the saying of the complainant, based on compromise between parties. In the result, this application fails and stands rejected," the Court ruled.Advocates Raghav Ram and Vibha Diwedi represented applicant..[Read Order]