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, the petitioners i.e., petitioner No.1 (original accused) and petitioner No.2 (survivor), seek quashing of the FIR registered with the Williamnagar Police Station, East Garo Hills, being Williamnagar Women PS Case No.28(11)2023, for the alleged offences punishable under the POSCO Act and consequently, the proceeding pending before the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Williamnagar, East Garo Hills, being Special (POCSO) Case No.5 of 2024. Quashing is sought on the premise that the petitioners were in a romantic relationship and at the relevant time, aged 20 years and 17 years and 5 months, respectively.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioners were in a romantic relationship and that the said relationship was accepted by the respective families. He submitted that the aforesaid FIR came to be registered only when the petitioner No.2, visited the Civil Hospital, Williamnagar, as she was four months pregnant for a routine medical checkup. He submitted that since the petitioner No.2 was a minor aged 17 years and 5 months, the respondent No.2- the Medical and Health Officer reported teenage pregnancy to the Williamnagar Police Station, resulting in registration of an FIR against the petitioner No.1. It appears that on 2nd January, 2024, the petitioner No.2 delivered a baby boy at Civil Hospital, Williamnagar. This Court vide order dated 11th May, 2026, had directed the petitioners to appear before the Secretary, High Court Legal Service Committee to enable the Secretary to submit a report, whether the consent given by the petitioner No.2 was an informed consent; whether the petitioner No.2 had received any benefit under any of the schemes from either the State or Central government, etc. Pursuant thereto, the Secretary has submitted her report dated 3rd June, 2026, which was taken on record on the last date.

5. From a perusal of the report, it appears that the petitioner No.1 today, is aged 24 years and the petitioner No.2, 20 years and that they are living together as husband and wife with their two years old son born out of the said relationship. It appears from the said report that the petitioner No.2 is the only child of her parents and lives with them in a house belonging to her aunt, who lives in another house in the same compound. It further appears that the petitioner No.1 and petitioner No.2 have got formally married on 30th May, 2026 in a church. Today, learned counsel for the petitioners has tendered a photocopy of the Certificate of Marriage of the petitioners issued by the Diocese of Tura. The said certificate is taken on record.

6. From the report given by the Secretary, High Court Legal Service Committee, it appears that the petitioner No.2 got married to petitioner No.1, voluntarily out of love and affection. It further appears that the petitioner No.2 has given her no objection to the quashing of the FIR and consequently, the proceeding initiated against the petitioner No.1. The petitioner No.2 has further stated before the Secretary, High Court Legal Service Committee, that she is happily living with the petitioner No.1 and has no complaint; and that she has not received any compensation or benefit either from the government or any other authority in connection with the case for herself or her child. As far as vocational training is concerned, petitioner No.2 has expressed her desire in pursuing a vocational training in tailoring, baking and confectionery streams, if given an opportunity.

7. This Court in Shri Shalenbor Wahlang v. State of Meghalaya & anr passed in Crl.Petn.No.92 of 2023 dated 12th March, 2026 has in paragraphs 31, 33, 34 and 35 observed as under:

                   “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.”

8. In view of the peculiar facts of this case, the observations made by this Court in the aforesaid judgment, the report of the Secretary, High Court Legal Service Committee, the fact that, the petitioners are married and have a child from the said marriage and in the larger interest of the petitioner No.2 and the child born from the said relationship, the FIR and consequently, the proceeding is quashed against the petitioner No.1.

9. The petition is accordingly allowed and the FIR registered with the Williamnagar Police Station, East Garo Hills, being Williamnagar Women PS Case No.28(11)2023, for the alleged offences punishable under the POSCO Act and consequently, the proceeding pending before the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Williamnagar, East Garo Hills, being Special (POCSO) Case No.5 of 2024, are quashed and set aside.

10. Needless to state that, the DCPO, East Garo Hills, Williamnagar and the Secretary, DSLA, East Garo Hills, Williamnagar, to take steps and verify whether the petitioner No.2 has received any benefit under any of the Central or State government Schemes for herself and her child. The Schemes are as under;

                   (i) Scheme for Care and Support to Victims of under Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act (exclusively for POSCO 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;

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

                   (xv) Insurance or any other scheme.”

11. The DCPO, East Garo Hills, Williamnagar as well as the Secretary, DLSA, East Garo Hills, Williamnagar, to assist the petitioner No.2 in receiving any benefit, as she and her child may be entitled to.

12. 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.

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

14. Petition is accordingly disposed of.

15. Stand over to 14th August, 2026 for recording compliance of the directions given.

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