Dismissed

Shrawan @ Shrawan Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC3 Apr 2023A482/9896/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a u/s 482 application, the applicant challenged proceedings under the POCSO Act based on an alleged compromise. The Court held that POCSO offences involving minor prosecutrices cannot be settled via compromise regardless of voluntariness and dismissed the application.

What did the court decide?

Application to quash proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed. Impugned proceedings stand upheld.

Shrawan @ Shrawan Yadav Vs State of U.P. and… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9896 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Shrawan @ Shrawan Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Yashwant Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.

¶5

The applicant has come challenging the proceedings of Special Session Trial No. 217 of 2018, State Vs. Shrawan (arising out of Case Crime No. 183 of 2018) under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station - Pharenda, District Maharajganj, pending before the Court of Learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Maharajganj.

¶6

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the parties have compromised the matter and has drawn the attention of the Court to a compromise application dated 19.10.2022. It is signed by the first informant, the prosecutrix, and the prosecutrix's mother on one hand and the accused-applicant on the other.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant in support of this application and Mr. S.S. Tiwari, learned A.G.A. on behalf of the State who has opposed the prayer to quash the proceedings.

¶8

It is pointed out that the prosecutrix was 16 years and 10 months old on the date of occurrence and in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she has said that she had gone with the applicant of her free will. The POCSO Act is a Special Legislation which is designed to protect minors' from sexual offences or abuse. It is a legislation which has been enacted to curtail a particular mischief and that is sexual exploitation of children. It matters little whether the prosecutrix went away with the applicant of her free will, or may be, had carnal relations voluntarily. The freedom of the adult has been consciously curtailed for a minor and what the legislature has particularly interdicted, cannot be permitted to happen through the mechanism of a so called compromise. A compromise in a POCSO case involving a minor prosecutrix would be an anathema.

¶9

In the opinion of this Court, no case for interference with the impugned proceedings is made out.

¶10

This application fails and is dismissed .

¶11

Let this order be communicated to the Special Judge, POCSO Act, Maharajganj through the learned Sessions Judge, Maharajganj by the Registrar (compliance).

¶12

Order Date :- 3.4.2023/Ashutosh

¶13

Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shrawan @ Shrawan Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shrawan @ Shrawan Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Amir @ Amir and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinod Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jalandhar Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home Department and another

Jaishree @ Mantu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jai Prakash Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dev Narayan Verma @ Pinku Vs State of U.P. . and Another