The Punjab and Haryana High Court has clearly stated that an FIR filed under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act cannot be cancelled just because the victim, after turning 18, agrees to compromise with the accused.
Justice Namit Kumar observed:
“FIRs involving heinous crimes like rape, especially under the POCSO Act, cannot be quashed on the ground that the victim, after attaining the age of majority, has chosen to compromise the matter with the accused without any justified reason.”
Read Also:- Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses PIL on Paddy Sowing Dates as Infructuous After Crops Already Sown
He explained that using powers under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to cancel such serious offences would go against the core aim of the law. The purpose of the POCSO Act is to protect children and ensure strict action against offenders.
The Court warned that allowing such compromises regularly could damage the intent of the Act.
“If such ‘Compromise Petitions’ by vulnerable witnesses are routinely accepted, it will defeat the object and purpose of the POCSO Act.”
The High Court further noted that this kind of compromise leads to misuse of the legal process and state resources. It emphasized that government machinery had been actively involved from the moment the FIR was filed, and allowing compromise at the trial’s final stage would waste those efforts.
The case involved serious charges under Sections 363, 366, 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The accused had requested cancellation of the FIR after reaching a compromise with the victim.
However, the Court noted that the trial was still at the stage of prosecution evidence.
“The petitioner cannot demand quashing of the FIR as a right in a non-compoundable offence.”
The Court also rejected the argument that the prosecutrix and her mother had turned hostile.
“Merely because the witnesses have turned hostile and settlement has happened is not a reason to acquit the accused.”
Read Also:- Supreme Court Restricts Ex-Post Facto Environmental Clearances; Quashes Previous Notifications
The prosecution still holds power to ask leading questions, and if the testimony aligns with other reliable evidence, the court can still rely on it to reach a decision.
In a surprising part of the case, the judge pointed out the contradiction in the mother’s behavior. Initially, she had filed the FIR under POCSO alleging rape of her minor daughter. But at the end of the trial, she claimed that the police had tricked her into signing blank papers.
Considering the gravity of the allegations and the stage of the case, the High Court firmly refused to cancel the FIR.
Rread Also:- Allahabad High Court Seeks Bar Views on Declaring 12 Non-Working Saturdays as Working Days
“Given the seriousness of the allegations, the FIR cannot be quashed.”
Advocates appearing in the case:
- Mr. Sauhard Singh for the petitioner
- Ms. Gaganpreet Kaur, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana
- Mr. Ankit Yadav for respondents No. 2 & 3
Case Title: PXXXXX v. State of Haryana and Others
