VIKASH KUMAR MAHTOversusThe State of Bihar

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                  CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22969 of 2022
          Arising Out of PS. Case No.-207 Year-2019 Thana- BAHERA District- Darbhanga
     ======================================================
     Vikash Kumar Mahto Binay Kumar Mahto R/O Village/Mohalla- Jagdishpur,
     P.S.- Manigachhi (Nehra O.P.), District- Darbhanga

                                                                      ... ... Petitioner/s
                                           Versus
1.   The State of Bihar
2.   Aarti Kumari Wife Of Vikash Kumar Mahto, D/O- Jhari Das R/O Village-
     Navtolia, P.S.- Bahera Diss- Darbhanga. Presently R/O Village/Mohalla-
     Jagdishpur, P.S.- Manigachhi (Nehra O.P.), District- Darbhanga

                                            ... ... Opposite Party/s
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Petitioner/s    :        Mr. Kedar Jha, Advocate
     For the O.P. No.2       :        Mr. Maya Shankar Mishra, Advocate
     For the State           :        Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP
     ======================================================
     CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
     ORAL JUDGMENT
      Date : 19-01-2026
                    Heard Mr. Kedar Jha, learned counsel for the

     petitioner, Mr. Maya Shankar Mishra, learned counsel for the

     opposite party no. 02 and Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, the learned

     APP for the State.

                  2. The present application has been filed on behalf of the

     petitioner for quashing the first information report bearing Bahera

     P.S. Case No. 207 of 2019 dated 10.05.2019 under Sections 376,

     341, 323, 504, 506, 313/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section

     3(1)(r), 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (POA) Act and subsequently Section

     4/6 of the POCSO Act was also added vide order dated

     24.06.2019.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22969 of 2022 dt.19-01-2026
                                            2/7




                    3. The short facts of the case which form the basis of the

       First Information Report is that the informant/victim aged about 16

       years has alleged that while she was staying along with her

       grandparents, the petitioner Vikash Kumar Mahto, who was a

       frequent visitor at her house, used to come to her house and

       indulge in sexual act with her on the pretext of marriage due to

       which she became pregnant but the said pregnancy was aborted. It

       is further alleged that upon having knowledge of the said facts, the

       parents of the informant/victim came and participated in a

       Panchayati held on 08.05.2019, where also the petitioner indulged

       in abuses and assault and refused to follow any advices of

       Panchayat.

                    4. The present application for quashing of the first

       information report has been filed on the ground that the parties to

       the proceeding had entered into a compromise and amicably

       settled the matter between themselves by filing a compromise

       petition before the Court of the Special Judge-cum-1st Additional

       Sessions Judge, POCSO Act, Darbhanga (Annexure -5) stating

       therein that the parties have compromised the matter out the court

       and good feelings having been restored between them and they are

       not desirous to proceed with the matter any further. It was also

       stated that by way of compromise petition that the parties had
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22969 of 2022 dt.19-01-2026
                                            3/7




       solemnized their marriage with each other and were living

       peacefully as husband and wife.

                    5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out the

       marriage between the parties was solemnized on 16.11.2018 itself

       and an affidavit stating the said fact has also been brought on

       record by way of Annexure -2. However, for the purposes of social

       recognition of the marriage, the said marriage was also performed

       in a temple on 29.07.2019, the receipt of which is Annexure-3 to

       the present application. The learned counsel has also drawn the

       attention of this Court to Annexure – 4, which is the medical

       examination report of the informant/ victim disclosing her age to

       be between 18 to 19 years. He has thus submitted that even

       considering this aspect of the matter, no offence under POCSO Act

       would be made out. It has further been submitted that the present

       case is one of a consensual relationship between two adults and the

       same has also subsequently resulted into a compromise between

       the parties, as a consequence of which, the parties are leading a

       peaceful conjugal life as husband and wife, also having a child out

       the said wedlock.

                    6. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 also

       supports the contentions made by the learned counsel for the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22969 of 2022 dt.19-01-2026
                                            4/7




       petitioner and has no objection if the FIR lodged against the

       petitioner is quashed.

                    7. The issue at hand has been minutely observed by

       Delhi High Court in CRL. M.C. 4168/2022 titled as Sonu @ Sunil

       vs State of NCT Delhi & Ors. wherein it was noted as under –

                             “26. Of late, however, the Courts are faced with
                petitions where children, who are about to attain the age of
                majority, in ignorance of the statutory prohibitions and
                restrictions and consequences, in the name of love, commit acts
                which would otherwise amount to offence under the provisions
                of the Child Marriage Act, POCSO Act, and the IPC. Though,
                being minor, their consent is immaterial, however, factually it is
                there. This situation makes the Courts face with two
                consequences, either to go strictly by the mandate of the statute
                and convict the boy and impose punishment on him, which is
                rather severe in these statutes, or to exercise its power under
                Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to protect the otherwise innocent
                children/adult by quashing the criminal proceedings. The
                Courts when faced with such a dilemma, has been adopting the
                route of exercising its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., to
                quash such criminal proceedings where it finds that the girl was
                nearing the age of majority; had gone with the boy of her own
                free will (though it may be immaterial in law); is happily living
                with the boy, either in matrimony or otherwise, after attaining
                the age of majority; and in some circumstances where such
                relationship has also resulted in children being born. The Court,
                in such circumstances, is persuaded to save the lives of such an
                accused, rather than to make him undergo trial and eventual
                punishment, which would not only ruin innocent lives of the
                parties to such a relationship, but may be, also of the children
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22969 of 2022 dt.19-01-2026
                                            5/7




                that are born therefrom. In this regard, apart from the judgments
                that have been cited by the learned Amicus, I may also refer to
                the judgment of the Supreme Court in Kapil Gupta v. State of
                NCT of Delhi and Another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1030,
                wherein the Supreme Court, while quashing an FIR and
                consequential proceedings where the accused had been charged
                with offence under Section 376 of the IPC, observed as under:-
                                     13. It can thus be seen that this Court has
                        clearly held that though the Court should be slow in
                        quashing the proceedings wherein heinous and serious
                        offences are involved, the High Court is not foreclosed
                        from examining as to whether there exists material for
                        incorporation of such an offence or as to whether there is
                        sufficient evidence which if proved would lead to proving
                        the charge for the offence charged with. The Court has
                        also to take into consideration as to whether the
                        settlement between the parties is going to result into
                        harmony between them which may improve their mutual
                        relationship.
                    8. So far as offences under Section 376 IPC or the

       POCSO Act are concerned, the Courts no doubt need to act with

       adequate prudence while quashing criminal proceedings even

       when a compromise has been reached, but at the same time it is

       also important that the Courts should not overlook or brush aside

       subsequent developments, including the factum of marriage

       between the parties especially when a child is also born out of the

       wedlock. In such circumstances, it will only be expedient in the

       interest of justice to quash the proceedings to bring peace and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22969 of 2022 dt.19-01-2026
                                            6/7




       secure the ends of justice. It has to be kept in mind that laws like

       POCSO Act are welfare legislations and the object is not to

       criminalize relationships. Very recently the Hon’ble Apex Court in

       the case of State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Anurudh & Anr. reported in

       2026 SCC OnLine SC 40 has highlighted the misuse of POCSO

       provisions by families to settle personal scores and suggested the

       Union Government to consider introducing a “Romeo-Juliet”

       clause into the law aimed at exempting consensual adolescent

       relationships.

                    9. Having heard the submissions of the parties and

       considering the judicial pronouncements in this regard, this Court

       is of the view that in the event of a compromise having been

       reached between the parties, continuation of criminal prosecution

       would serve no useful purpose as the same has also been held in

       the case of Naushey Ali vs State of U.P. reported in (2025) 4 SCC

       78 where the Apex Court has observed that when the parties have

       amicably resolved the dispute, proceeding with the trial would be

       an exercise in futility and the ends of justice require that the

       settlement be given effect to by quashing the proceeding as

       continuance of the same would be a grave abuse of the process of

       Court, particularly when the dispute is settled and resolved and
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22969 of 2022 dt.19-01-2026
                                                         7/7




                    would only prolong bitterness between the parties and needlessly

                    burden the justice system.

                                 10. Accordingly, criminal prosecution arising out of

                    Bahera P.S. Case No. 207 of 2019 is quashed as against the

                    petitioner and the instant application is allowed.



                                                 (Soni Shrivastava, J)
devendra/-
AFR/NAFR                AFR
CAV DATE                NA
Uploading Date          27.01.2026
Transmission Date       27.01.2026