Oral Order

1. None appeared for the respondent No.2 - original complainant, when the matter is called out for the hearing.

2. By way of preferring the present application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the applicant-accused seeks to invoke the inherent powers of this Court, praying to quash and set-aside the First Information Report No. 11204067240058 of 2024 registered with the Sevaliya Police Station, District Kheda, for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(a), 4, 5(l), 6 and 18 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 as well as the proceedings of the Special (POCSO) Case No.55 of 2024 pending before the learned Special POCSO Court, Nadiad, so also all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto.

3. On 05.01.2026, the victim was personally present before this Court and had stated that she got married with the present applicant and blessed with one child, and she does not want to proceed further with the matter. The victim has also filed an affidavit, which is annexed to the application. In the said affidavit, the victim has categorically stated that she had married with the applicant and they both are residing together happily and out of this wedlock, one baby boy is also born out. She had further stated that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved and there is no ill-will or any grievance amongst him.

4. Considering the issue involved in the present application as well as considering the fact that the dispute has been amicably resolved between the parties, with the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the present application is taken up for final disposal.

5. RULE returnable forthwith. Learned APP Mr. Manan Maheta waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent no.1 - State and learned advocate Mr. Brijesh K. Ramanuj waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent no.3 - victim.

6. Learned advocate for the applicant-accused has submitted that since the dispute has been amicably resolved between the parties, the application may be allowed and the impugned FIR may be quashed and set-aside.

7. The victim, who was personally present in the Court on 05.01.2026, had categorically stated before this Court that she has no objection if the application is allowed and the FIR is quashed and set-aside. Thus, it appears from the aforesaid that sending the applicant-accused to face the trial would be nothing but a futile exercise and would amount to abuse of process of law.

8. The relevant paragraphs of the affidavit filed by the victim read thus :

          "I say and submit that the applicant and I were in love relationship since long time, however, my father, respondent no. 2 herein was against the said relationship and therefore, I left my parental home and eloped with the applicant no. 1 with my will and wish. I further submit that on 06.03.2025 we got married at Nathkuva and since then we both are residing as Husband and Wife happily. It is further submitted that out of the said wedlock one baby boy is also born out. The applicant has not committed any offence for which the respondent no.2 has registered the FIR against the applicant. Now I don't have any grievance with the Applicant and therefore I am filing this affidavit in support the quashing of FIR filed by my father.

          I further state that as such now I intend that I have no objection if the F.I.R filed by my father is quashed. All misunderstanding and bitterness between us have also been removed. I further state that as such now I intend that I have no objection if the F.I.R filed by my father is quashed as well as all subsequent proceedings arise out of the same.

          I state that what is stated herein above is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief and I believe the same to be true and correct."

9. Having heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties as well as considering the facts and circumstances arising out of the present application and taking into consideration the decisions rendered in the cases of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Another, reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab, reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582, Nikhil Merchant vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, reported in (2009) 1 GLH 31, Manoj Sharma vs. State & Others, reported in (2009) 1 GLH 190, and Narinder Singh & Others vs. State of Punjab & Another, reported in (2014) 2 Crime 67 (SC) as well as State of Haryana vs. Bhajanlal, reported in AIR 1992 SC 604, it appears that further continuation of the criminal proceedings in relation to the impugned FIR and the Special (POCSO) Case against the applicant-accused would be nothing but unnecessary harassment to the applicant-accused. It further appears that the trial would be a futile exercise and continuing further with the proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR would amount to abuse of process of law. Hence, to secure the ends of justice, the impugned FIR and Special (POCSO) Case so also all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto are required to be quashed and set-aside in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

10. In the result, the application is allowed. The First Information Report No. 11204067240058 of 2024 registered with the Sevaliya Police Station, District Kheda, for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(a), 4, 5(l), 6 and 18 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 as well as the proceedings of the Special (POCSO) Case No.55 of 2024 pending before the Court of the learned Special POCSO Court, Nadiad, so also all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto are hereby ordered to be quashed and set- aside, qua the present applicant only.

11. Since the applicant is in judicial custody, the concerned authority is directed to release the applicant forthwith, if he is not required in any other offence.

12. Rule made absolute. Direct service is permitted.