The Allahabad High Court observed that offences under the Prevention of Children From Sexual Offenses (POCSO) Act cannot merely be dismissed on the basis of “compromise” between the accused and the victim.
Dismissing a petition filed by one Sanjeev Kumar – an accused under POCSO Act – Justice Samit Gopal observed, “Once the consent of the minor prosecutrix victim is immaterial for registration of offense, then such consent shall still remain immaterial for all practical purposes at all the stages including for compromise.”
“Merely because the minor prosecutrix has later on agreed to enter into a compromise with the applicant, (it) would not be sufficient to quash the proceedings under the POCSO Act,” Justice Gopal noted.
The accused petitioner had sought setting aside of summoning and cognisance orders as well as a stay on the criminal proceedings underway before the special judge, POCSO Act, at Uttar Pradesh’s Azamgarh against him.
The case was under sections 376 (rape), 313 (causing miscarriage without women’s consent) and other sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and 3/4 of the POCSO Act, which was earlier lodged at the Bilariganj police station of the Azamgarh district.
In his petition, the accused had moved the court saying that a compromise had been entered into between the parties after the lodging of the FIR, conclusion of the probe and summoning of the applicant by a trial court for the alleged offenses. It added that the case be decided on the basis of the said compromise.
The victim’s counsel also supported the accused person’s petition. However, opposing the plea, the state counsel noted that accusations against the accused said that he subjected the victim – aged 15 at the time of the incident – to sexual assault over period of three years.
It was also observed that the charge sheet was filed under various relevant sections, keeping in mind that the victim was a minor at the time of the incident. The trial court had summoned him after finding a prima facie offense against the applicant.
It was argued that the petition should be dismissed since a compromise in a case of this nature cannot be entertained.
Citing various Supreme Court judgments, the court in its order – dated April 2 – noted that in the offenses which are alleged to have been committed under a “special statute” like POCSO, the prosecution cannot be quashed merely based on a compromise between the victim and the offender.
Justice Gopal also said that such a power is not to be exercised in cases of such heinous and serious crimes. “Such offenses are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society,” the court reportedly observed.
(With PTI inputs)
Comments
0 comment