In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court set aside a criminal case under the POCSO Act against a man accused of having a relationship with his minor wife, noting that continuing the prosecution would ultimately harm the very person the law seeks to protect.
The court emphasized that while the law treats a minor as a victim, the absence of any actual grievance or harm cannot be ignored in exceptional circumstances.
Background of the Case
The petition was filed by Harmeet Singh seeking quashing of an FIR registered under Section 64(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
The case arose when doctors at Safdarjung Hospital informed the police after discovering that the girl, who had delivered a child, was a minor at the time of conception.
Read also:- Supreme Court Rejects Plea for FIR Against Wife in Dowry Case, Upholds Legal Protection Under Law
According to records, the couple had married in September 2024. At that time, the man was 22 years old, while the girl was about 17. They later had a child and were living together as a family.
Notably, the FIR was not filed by the girl but triggered by mandatory reporting requirements under the law.
Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani noted the unusual nature of the case, where the prosecutrix herself denied suffering any harm and sought closure of the proceedings.
The court observed that the legal framework creates a “de-juré victim” (a victim in law), but in this case, there was arguably no “de-facto victim” (a person who actually suffered harm).
Read also:- Kerala High Court Refuses to Quash Cheque Bounce Case, Says Withdrawal Slip Can Qualify as Cheque
“The court must consider whether pressing the prosecution would, in fact, re-victimise the very person the law intends to protect,” the bench noted.
It further remarked that strict application of the statute, without regard to consequences, could lead to “serious injustice,” especially when the minor herself stated she had entered the relationship voluntarily and was now living peacefully with her husband and child.
The judge also referred to multiple High Court and Supreme Court rulings where similar proceedings were quashed when parties had married and settled down.
At the same time, the court acknowledged opposing views that stress that consent of a minor has no legal value and such offences are crimes against society.
Read also:- Supreme Court Upholds COFEPOSA Detention in Gold Smuggling Case, Rejects Pleas of Two Accused
The central question before the court was whether criminal proceedings should continue when:
- the law treats the girl as a victim due to her age,
- but she herself denies any injury or wrongdoing,
- and continuation of the case could disrupt her family life.
The court refrained from validating “consent of a minor” but instead focused on the absence of actual harm and the consequences of prosecution.
The Delhi High Court allowed the petition and quashed the FIR along with all proceedings arising from it.
It held that continuing the case would be “an exercise in futility” and would cause grave harm to the woman and her child, effectively defeating the purpose of justice.
Case Details
Case Title: Harmeet Singh vs State of GNCT Delhi & Anr.
Case Number: W.P.(CRL) 1985/2025
Judge: Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani
Decision Date: 16 April 2026
