New developments have taken place in matters pertaining to The Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO ACT), the Allahabad High Court has made a pertinent finding in the case: Om Prakash V. State.
The learned single judge Justice J.J. Munir of the honourable High Court made a crucial finding that cases in which minors are subjected to grave offences like rape and molestation which come under the POCSO Act, 2012 are not to be, and cannot be quashed on the ground that a compromise has been made between the complainant and the accused.
Brief Facts Of The POCSO Case:
In this present case, an application was before the Allahabad High Court seeking quashing of proceedings of Sessions case against the accused, the basis on which this plea was sought was that the Complainant and the Accused had now gotten married and are living as married couple. This plea of the applicant was rejected by the honourable Court, which provided that the Court cannot stop and interdict the prosecution and thereby quash the ongoing proceedings against the applicant just based on the fact that a compromise had been reached by the parties.
- The applicant, in this case, had sought quashing of proceedings of Sessions case against him and he is the accused in FIR lodged by the Complainant-Opposite party no.2
- That as per the FIR, the complainant was a widow who befriended the Accused.
- The said Complainant has 5 children comprising 3 sons and 2 daughters from her deceased husband.
- That as per the FIR, the accused (applicant of the application in the present case) had made carnal relations with the complainant and had made false promises to marry her.
- The accused (applicant of the application in the present case) also subjected the complainant’s daughter to molestation, as per the FIR
- According to the FIR, he also subjected the complainant to a beating.
- Further, as per the FIR, the accused proceeded to ravish the complainant.
- The Complainant had supported her FIR with a statement given under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., complainant’s minor daughter had further supported her statement alleging rape and molestation.
- The Accused and the Complainant-Opposite party no.2 later got married as per Hindu Rites almost one year after the alleged offences.
- That the Complainant-Opposite party subsequently filed an application before the Special Judge to dispose of the ongoing prosecution on the ground of Compromise.
- The Honourable Allahabad High Court rejected the application of the Applicant.
Rationale Given By The Court Behind Its Decision :
The honourable court brought to light many cogent points based on which the plea of the applicant could not be accepted even though the complainant sought the same relief and had filed an application before the special judge for disposal of the prosecution proceedings, the said points which were brought to light by the honourable Court were –
- In matters such as the present case, where prosecution of heinous and grave offences like rape and subjugation of minors to molestation is involved which are punishable under the POCSO Act, 2012, in such cases the victims are not at liberty to engage in compromises with the offenders as if these matters were of the nature of compoundable offences.Â
- Further, the Court also pointed out the fact that in such cases it is the State which has the onus of prosecution and the duty of proceeding with the prosecution lies with the State.
- That the objective of the Court in cases where heinous offences have been committed such as the present one is to ascertain the reality that is the truth in the allegations. This said objective of the court is not dependent on the accused’s relations with the complainant.
- That it is essential to ascertain and establish the truth before a competent Court as offences like rape or those provided under the POCSO Act are offences against society.
