Lala Ji v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC12 Aug 2025A482/14755/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 CrPC quashing; POCSO trial quashed on compromise and marriage with victim; Sections 363/366/376 IPC read with Section 4 POCSO Act; Case Crime No.77 of 2016, P.S. Devrahat, Kanpur Dehat/Ramabai Nagar; Special Sessions Trial No.28 of 2017; compromise dated 06.02.2024 verified by Special Judge (POCSO) per coordinate Bench order 06.05.2024; happy family life doctrine; K. Dhandapani (2022 SCC Online SC 1056); Mafat Lal (2022) 6 SCC 589; charge sheet dated 20.12.2016 and summoning order dated 10.02.2017 quashed; Allahabad High Court, Avnish Saxena, J., decided 13.08.2025.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the charge sheet dated 20.12.2016, the cognizance/summoning order dated 10.02.2017, and the entire criminal proceedings/trial of Special Sessions Trial No.28 of 2017 (State Vs. Lala Ji) arising out of Case Crime No.77 of 2016.

Lala Ji Vs State of U.P. and Another — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶15

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire criminal proceedings of Special Sessions Trial No.28 of 2017 (State Vs. Lala Ji), the charge sheet dated 20.12.2016 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 10.02.2017 arising out of Case Crime No.77 of 2016 (Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 4 POCSO Act) should be quashed on the basis of the compromise dated 06.02.2024, given that the applicant has married the daughter of opposite party no.2 and they are living happily with children.

¶¶7

Court's answer

In view of the compromise dated 06.02.2024 (verified by the Special Judge (POCSO) pursuant to the coordinate Bench order dated 06.05.2024) and the marriage of the applicant with the daughter of opposite party no.2, and relying on the Apex Court decisions in K. Dhandapani and Mafat Lal, the charge sheet and the proceedings arising out of Case Crime No.77 of 2016 are quashed, and consequently the proceedings of the trial are also quashed.

¶¶14

Ratio / Principle

The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed accordingly.

¶¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Avnish Saxena, J.; Order dated 13.08.2025) allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and quashed the charge sheet dated 20.12.2016, the cognizance/summoning order dated 10.02.2017 and the entire criminal proceedings of Special Sessions Trial No.28 of 2017 (State Vs. Lala Ji), arising out of Case Crime No.77 of 2016 under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 4 POCSO Act, Police Station Devrahat, District Ramabai Nagar/Kanpur Dehat. The quashing rested on the compromise dated 06.02.2024 between the parties (at pages 95 to 99, verified by the Additional District & Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No.13, Kanpur Dehat pursuant to the coordinate Bench order dated 06.05.2024), the admission of opposite party no.2 that he did not wish to continue with the case, and the fact that the applicant and the daughter of opposite party no.2 are happily married with children. Reliance was placed on K. Dhandapani v. State by the Inspector of Police, (2022 SCC Online SC 1056), where the Apex Court set aside conviction under the POCSO Act observing it could not "shut its eyes to the ground reality and disturb the happy family life" of the accused and the prosecutrix, and on Mafat Lal and another v. The State of Rajasthan, (2022) 6 SCC 589, where FIR and consequential proceedings under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C. were quashed considering the marriage of accused and victim.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:138263

¶2

Court No. - 79

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14755 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Lala Ji Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Akansha Verma,Deepak Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anemash Kumar Kushwaha,G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Avnish Saxena,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel the applicant, learned counsel for opposite party no.2

¶7

The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved with a prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings of Special Sessions Trial No.28 of 2017 (State Vs. Lala Ji) as well as charge sheet dated 20.12.2016 and cognizance/summoning order dated 10.02.2017, arising out of Case Crime No.77 of 2016, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 4 POCSO Act, Police Station Devrahat, District Ramabai Nagar/Kanpur Dehat, pending before the court of Additional District & Sessions Judge,Court No.13, Kanpur Dehat on the basis of compromise dated 06.02.2024.

¶8

Sri Deepak Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the applicant appears and submits that the parties have entered into a compromise. The allegation against the applicant is of enticing of daughter of opposite party no.2. He further submits that present applicant and daughter of opposite party no.2 are happily married and having children.

¶9

Sri Anemash Kumar Kushwaha, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 admits that there is a compromise between the parties and opposite party no.2 does not want to continue with the case.

¶10

5.The parties have entered into compromise, which is at page nos.95 to 99, duly verified by the court of Additional District & Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No.13, Kanpur Dehat in terms of order passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court on 06.05.2024.

¶11

The Apex Court in the case of K. Dhandapani Vs. State by the Inspector of Police (2022 SCC Online SC 1056) has set

¶12

aside the conviction and sentence of the accused affirmed by the High Court in the matter of POCSO Act considering that the accused and victim are living happily in their married life and held that "This Court cannot shut its eyes to the ground reality and disturb the happy family life of the appellant and the prosecutrix" .

¶13

The Apex Court in another case of Mafat Lal and another Vs. The State of Rajasthan (2022) 6 SCC 589 has quashed the F.I.R. and consequential proceedings of offence U/s 363, 366 I.P.C. considering the marriage of accused and victim.

¶14

Thus, the charge sheet and the proceeding arose out of case crime number mentioned above is hereby quashed. Consequently, the proceedings of trial also quashed.

¶15

The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed accordingly.

¶16

Order Date :- 13.8.2025 MN/-

¶17

(Avnish Saxena,J.)

¶18

Digitally signed by :- MAHENDRA NATH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Lala Ji v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lala Ji v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases