Judgment (Oral):

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith with the consent of the parties and the aforesaid petition is taken up for final disposal.

3. By this petition preferred under Section 528 of the BNSS, the petitioner seeks quashing of the FIR registered with the Williamagar Police Station, being Williamnagar Woman P.S. Case No. 30 (11) of 2023, at the instance of the Police of Williamnagar Police Station, as against the petitioner for the alleged offence punishable under Section 5(j)(ii) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

4. Quashing is sought on the premise that relationship between the parties i.e., the petitioner and the respondent No. 5 (prosecutrix) was consensual and that they are living together as husband and wife since 2022-23; that they have a child from the said relationship and today, they are living together as husband and wife. It appears that at the relevant time, when the case was registered qua the petitioner, the respondent No. 5 (prosecutrix) was aged 17 years 8 months. It appears that when the petitioner No. 5 delivered a child, she was 19 years of age.

5. As noted aforesaid, since at the time of the incident, the respondent No. 5 (prosecutrix) was 17 years and 8 months, the Police of the Williamnagar Women Police Station lodged the aforesaid FIR as against the petitioner alleging the aforesaid offence.

6. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent No. 5, the relationship between them was consensual and that from the said relationship, a child, who is currently 3 years of age, was born. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent No. 5 that although, the parties were living together as husband and wife, they have now got married on 06.06.2026.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has tendered a photocopy of the Marriage Certificate issued as per the Garo Baptist Convention. The photocopy of the said Marriage Certificate is taken on record. The Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee has also tendered her report. From the said report, it appears that the relationship between the petitioner and the respondent No. 5 was consensual and that from the said relationship, there is a child. It also appears that the families of both sides had consented to their decision of getting married, pursuant to which, the parties i.e., the petitioner and the respondent No. 5 have got married and the Marriage Certificate has been placed before this Court today.

8. From the report of the Secretary, High Court Legal Servies Committee dated 17.04.2026, it also appears that the respondent No. 5 has no objection to the quashing of the proceeding and that the said consent has been given by her voluntarily and without any coercion. The report further reveals that the respondent No. 5 is happily living with the petitioner and has no complaint against him. It further appears from the report that the respondent No. 5 has not received any compensation from any authority either for herself or her son. From the report, it also appears that the respondent No. 5 wishes to resume her education (since she has passed Class IX standard).

9. The report of the police also shows that the parties i.e., the petitioner and the respondent No. 5 have now got married on 06.06.2026, in the presence of both the family members.

10. This Court in its judgment in the case of Shri Shalenbor Wahlang and anr. v. State of Meghalaya & anr. passed in Crl.Petn. No. 92 of 2023 dated 10th April, 2026 in paragraphs 31, 33, 34 and 35 has observed as hereunder:

                   “31. The ground realities in the State of Meghalaya cannot be ignored and lost sight of. It shows high incidents of adolescent consensual relationships culminating in elopement and early marriage or living together, as husband and wife, which is recognised by the society. Infact, cases of adolescent relationships where the parties i.e., the victim and the boy have got married or are living together as husband and wife and have a child from the said relationship are far too many, resulting in parties filing petitions under Section 528 BNSS (earlier, Section 482 Cr.P.C.) seeking quashing of the proceeding by consent of the parties.

                   32. .....

                   33. What also cannot be lost sight of is, that in Meghalaya, matrilineal system is a rare, ancient societal structure among the Khasi, Garo and Jaintia tribes, where lineage and inheritance pass through the mother. Children take their mother’s surname, the youngest daughter inherits the property (is the custodian of ancestral property) and the husband often moves into the wife’s house. The system is believed to have originated from an agrarian society and the need to protect the family structure, ensuring women’s economic security, social stability and the preservation of tribal identity. Infact, in the Khasi community, women have more independence than women in many patriarchal communities, including the freedom to select their partners, remarry without shame and take an active role in public places like market place and businesses. It is in this background that this Court would have to consider a case seeking quashing of a POCSO case by consent, keeping in mind all factors, including the girl’s (victim’s) and her child’s social security, by ensuring that she and the child get the benefit of the government schemes, including under the POCSO Act.

                   34. Thus, from the aforesaid discussion, quashing of a POCSO case under Section 528 BNSS by consent, is permissible even if it is a special statute and there is no specific exclusion of any present law/custom. However, the said discretion has to be used with due care and caution and circumspection in exceptional cases, to do justice. As noted earlier, there cannot be any straitjacket formula as to in which cases the said discretion can or cannot be exercised, inasmuch as, that would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case i.e., the age of the parties coming before the court; whether the consent given by the victim is an informed consent and not under coercion of the family members or the boy; that the victim and the accused are married and have a child or are living together as husband and wife, as per the customs in the State of Meghalaya, etc. Where parties are living together as husband and wife or are married, a police report, or a report from any authority, be called for, verifying the said claim. Also, while considering whether the consent of the victim is an ‘informed consent’, it is necessary that the victim places her affidavit on record giving her ‘No Objection’ to the quashing of the case. That, before such an affidavit is accepted, in order to ensure that the consent is an informed consent, the victim may be sent before the Secretary, MLSA or Secretary, DLSA to ascertain whether the consent is an informed consent, by giving her time to ponder over the same; and a report be called for, before such quashing petition is considered. While quashing the case, the Government schemes that may be available to a victim in a POCSO Act and the child born from the said relationship also be given due weightage as suggested and directed by the Apex Court in the case of Re: Right to Privacy of Adolescents (supra).

                   35. No doubt, we are conscious of the fact that a case under POCSO Act, is not a case against an individual, but is an offence against the society as a whole, however, the administration or enforcement of the law cannot be divorced from lived realities. Rendering justice demands not only that the law be applied with precision, but also that it be tempered with fairness, compassion and empathy when the situation/facts of a case, warrant it. Thus, it is necessary to maintain a fine balance between the competing interests of justice, deterrence and rehabilitation. Where the victim and the boy are married or are living together as husband and wife (and recognised), and have a child/children, sending the boy to jail would not serve the cause of justice, rather it would cause great injustice to the victim and the child born from the said consensual relationship, as ultimately, the aim of the law is to do justice. Thus, in cases where the court comes to the conclusion, that the consent given by the victim is a genuine and informed consent and that it would be greater injustice to send the boy to jail, instead of letting the parties live together as one family, the Court may consider quashing the case, pending trial, keeping in mind what is stated aforesaid. We may note, considering the large number of POCSO cases, in particular Romeo – Juliet cases, it is the responsibility of the State Government to create awareness amongst the people, including the children about the provisions of the POCSO Act, its punishment, etc., not only in the cities but also in the interior and remote places, including schools, colleges, etc.”

11. In view of the aforesaid facts, the judgment of this Court as reproduced hereinabove, that from the said relationship, the petitioner and the respondent No. 5 have a son, who is today aged 3 years, there is no impediment in allowing the petition. If the FIR/proceeding is not quashed, great prejudice will be caused to the respondent No. 5 and the child born from the said relationship.

12. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the FIR registered with the Williamagar Police Station, being Williamnagar Woman P.S. Case No. 30 (11) 2023 and consequently, the proceeding pending before the learned Special Judge POCSO, Williamnagar being POCSO Case No. 11 of 2024, stands quashed and set aside.

13. Needles to state, that the DCPO, East Garo Hills District, Williamnagar as well as the Secretary, DLSA, East Garo Hills District, Williamnagar to ensure that the respondent No. 5 gets benefits for herself and her son, as they may be entitled to, under the following Schemes;

                   (i) Scheme for Care and Support to Victims of under Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act (exclusively for POCSO victims) [Nirbhaya Fund];

                   (ii) Mission Vatsalya Scheme (Child Protection Services);

                   (iii) Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao (BBBP) Scheme;

                   (iv) Meghalaya Victim Compensation Scheme, 2022;

                   (v) Meghalaya Health Insurance Scheme;

                   (vi) Ayushman Bharat-PM-JAY (free health);

                   (vii) Mission 1000 Days-Meghalaya;

                   (viii) Rashtriya Bal Swasthya Karyakram (RBSK);

                   (ix) Chief Minister’s Safe Motherhood Scheme or CM-SMS;

                   (x) Special Training Programme for age-appropriate admission of Out of School Children (OoSC) and Back to School Campaign;

                   (xi) Samagra Siksha (Back to School);

                   (xii) NALSA (Child-Friendly Legal Services for Children) Scheme 2024;

                   (xiii) NALSA (Legal Services to Persons with Mental Illness and Persons with intellectual Disabilities) Scheme, 2024; and

                   (xiv) Mission Shakti-Women’s Safety, Support and Empowerment; and

                   (xv) Insurance or any other scheme.

14. The DCPO, East Garo Hills District, Williamnagar as well as the Secretary, DLSA, East Garo Hills District, Williamnagar to also take steps to ensure that the respondent No. 5 is given assistance to enrol herself in a school since she desires going back to school.

15. The Registry to forward forthwith a copy of this order to both, the Member Secretary, Meghalaya State Legal Services Authority, Shillong and Commissioner and Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Shillong as well as to the DCPO, East Garo Hills District, Williamnagar and the Secretary, DLSA, East Garo Hills District, Williamnagar to enable them to take steps and comply with the same.

16. The petition is allowed and Rule is made absolute on the aforesaid terms.

17. Petition is, accordingly disposed of.

18. Stand over to 19th August, 2026 for recording compliance of the directions given.

19. All parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order.