The Meghalaya High Court has quashed a case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act against a 27-year-old man after noting that he had married the survivor, the couple were living together and were raising their four-year-old daughter. The court also directed the authorities to ensure that the woman and her child receive all eligible government welfare benefits and assistance.
The petition was jointly filed by the accused and the survivor, seeking the quashing of an FIR registered at the Ri-Bhoi Women Police Station in 2021 and the criminal proceedings pending before the Special Judge (POCSO), Ri-Bhoi. According to the petition, the survivor was a minor and pregnant when the FIR was lodged. After attaining the age of majority, she began living with the accused, and the couple solemnised their marriage before the Marriage Registrar at Nongpoh in March 2026.
A report submitted by the Secretary of the High Court Legal Services Committee confirmed that the couple were residing together with their four-year-old daughter. The report also noted that the woman had enrolled in a diploma course in Laboratory Technology but had discontinued her studies because of the pending criminal proceedings. It recorded her desire to resume her education or study law and her interest in vocational training in tailoring. The report further stated that she had no objection to the criminal proceedings against her husband being quashed.
While allowing the petition, the High Court relied on its earlier judgment in Shalenbor Wahtang vs State of Meghalaya, which recognised the prevalence of consensual adolescent relationships in the state and the need to consider social realities in exceptional cases. The court observed that such relationships often culminate in marriage or long-term partnerships with children and said these circumstances could not be ignored while deciding individual cases.
The bench reiterated that quashing proceedings under the POCSO Act by consent is permissible only in exceptional situations, provided the survivor’s consent is voluntary and informed. It said factors including the marriage of the parties, the welfare of the child and verification by legal authorities must be taken into account, emphasising that each case should be decided on its own facts rather than through a fixed formula.
The court further observed that although offences under the POCSO Act are offences against society, the application of the law must also reflect the realities of individual cases. It noted that where a couple are married or living together with children, imprisoning the husband could, in certain circumstances, cause greater hardship to both the survivor and the child than allowing the family to remain together.
Taking into account the legal report and the present circumstances of the family, the High Court held that continuation of the criminal trial would not be appropriate. It accordingly quashed the FIR and the pending proceedings before the Special Court.
The court also directed that the survivor and her daughter be provided benefits under applicable Central and state welfare schemes, including the Nirbhaya Fund scheme for POCSO victims, Mission Vatsalya, the Meghalaya Victim Compensation Scheme, Ayushman Bharat-PMJAY, Mission Shakti and other relevant programmes. It further instructed the District Legal Services Authority and the District Child Protection Officer in Ri-Bhoi to assist the woman in pursuing higher education or vocational training within eight weeks.
