Child Victims Or Their Families Can’t Compromise Offence Under POCSO Act: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court was considering a petition filed by a 49-year-old man seeking quashing of an FIR registered under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the POCSO Act.
Justice Sachin Datta, Delhi High Court
While refusing to quash an FIR, the Delhi High Court has held that the child victim or his/her family cannot compromise an offence under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).
The High Court was considering a petition filed by a 49-year-old man seeking quashing of an FIR registered under sections 376, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) on the basis of a compromise stated to have been arrived at with the victim on the intervention of her family.
The Single Bench of Justice Sachin Datta held, “Resultantly, the child victim or their family cannot compromise an offence under the POCSO Act. Quashing the proceedings at this stage on the basis of a compromise would defeat not only the object of the statute but also the ends of justice.”
Advocate Rakesh Rajmurti represented the Petitioner while Additional Public Prosecutor Hemant Mehla represented the Respondent.
Factual Background
The allegations were of aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon a child by a person in a position of trust or authority, punishable under sections 376, 506 of IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The Trial was at the stage of prosecution evidence.
Reasoning
Referring to the alleged offences, the Bench noted that the same are heinous offences which have a serious impact on society.
The Bench relied upon a judgment of the Apex Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012), wherein while recognizing the power of the High Court to quash non-compoundable offences under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on the basis of settlement between parties, it was clarified that this inherent power cannot be exercised in respect of heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or sexual offences.
Thus, holding that the the child victim or their family cannot compromise an offence under the POCSO Act, the Bench dismissed the petition.
Cause Title: Anand Singh Rawat v. The State and Another (Neutral Citation: 2026:DHC:8211)
Appearance
Petitioner: Advocate Rakesh Rajmurti
Respondent: Additional Public Prosecutor Hemant Mehla, Advocate Pankaj Kumar Sharma