HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Crl.Petn.No.1/2025 Date of Order: 15.04.2026 Shri Kyrshanskhem Kharumnuid ..... Petitioner Vs. 1. The State of Meghalaya, represented by its Commissioner and Secretary (Home), Shillong. 2. The Officer-in-Charge, Madanriting Police Station, Shillong, East Khasi Hills. 3. Smti. Bateihun Lyngdoh Nongbri 4. XYZ ..... Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Revati Mohite Dere, Chief Justice Appearance: For the Petitioners : Mr. S.A. Pandit, Adv For the Respondents : Mr. H. Abraham, GA Ms. R. Dkhar, Adv for R/4 i) Whether approved for reporting in No Law journals etc.: ii) Whether approved for publication in press: Yes JUDGMENT: (Oral) Heard learned counsel for the parties. Serial No.10 Daily List 2026:MLHC:356 2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith with the consent of the parties and the aforesaid petition is taken up for final disposal. 3. By this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the FIR/proceeding under the POCSO Act with the consent of the the respondent No. 4 (victim). 4. The petitioner, at the relevant time was 18 years of age and the respondent No. 4, 17 years. According to the petitioner and the respondent No. 4, they were in a romantic relationship and that the relationship between the two was consensual. It further appears that from the said physical relationship, the respondent No. 4 became pregnant and delivered a baby boy on 19th May, 2023. It further appears that the petitioner and the respondent No. 4 got married on 2nd September, 2025 on attaining the age of majority. 5. Today, the petitioner is 22 years of age and the respondent No. 4 is 20 years. According to the petitioner and the respondent No. 4, they were initially living together as husband and wife and 2026:MLHC:356 now they are married. The respondent No. 4 has filed her affidavit. In the said affidavit, she has stated that she is living with the petitioner since 3rd May, 2024 as husband and wife in a rented house and that they are taking care of their child. She has further stated that the petitioner on attaining the age of majority i.e., 21 years as required for marriage, got married to the respondent No. 4, on 2nd September, 2025. To the additional affidavit filed by the respondent No.4, the certificate of marriage has been annexed. In the said affidavit, she has given her ‘no objection’ to the quashing of the proceeding initiated at her mother’s behest. 6. On the last date, the respondent No.4 was present in person. When questioned, she reiterated what was stated by her in the affidavit. She has stated that she was in the 11th standard at the relevant time and that she wishes to continue with her education. Considering the same, this Court directed the parties to appear before the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee to enable the Secretary to record the statement of the respondent No.4, as to whether the consent given by her was an 2026:MLHC:356 informed consent; whether she has received any benefit from any of the schemes, either of the State or Central government; whether the respondent No.4 wishes to continue with her education etc. Pursuant thereto, the parties appeared before the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee. Accordingly, the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee has submitted her report dated 10th April, 2026 in a sealed envelope. The said envelope is opened and is taken on record. From the said report, it appears that the parties were initially living together as husband and wife with their son aged 3 years and on attaining majority, the petitioner and the respondent No.4 got married. It also appears from the report that the petitioner (accused) is bearing all the expenses at home and is taking care of the respondent No.4 and the child. It also appears that the respondent No.4 has given her no objection to the quashing of the FIR/case voluntarily without any force or coercion or any condition attached to the same. 7. It further appears from the said report that the respondent No.4 is happily married to the petitioner and that both have no 2026:MLHC:356 complaints against each other. It also appears that the respondent No.4 has not received any compensation or benefit from any of the government schemes either for herself or the child; that the respondent No.4 has an Aadhaar card and intends to apply for an Aadhaar card for her son; and that the respondent No.4 wishes to resume her studies and would like to pursue her education or any vocational training in cooking, if given an opportunity. 8. This Court (Coram: Chief Justice and Justice Thangkhiew) in its judgment passed in Criminal Petition No.92 of 2023 dated 12th March, 2026 has in paragraphs 31, 33, 34 and 35 observed as under: “31. The ground realities in the State of Meghalaya cannot be ignored and lost sight of. It shows high incidents of adolescent consensual relationships culminating in elopement and early marriage or living together, as husband and wife, which is recognised by the society. Infact, cases of adolescent relationships where the parties i.e., the victim and the boy have got married or are living together as husband and wife and have a child from the said relationship are far too many, resulting in parties filing petitions under Section 528 BNSS (earlier, Section 482 Cr.P.C.) seeking quashing of the proceeding by consent of the parties. 32. ..... 2026:MLHC:356 33. What also cannot be lost sight of is, that in Meghalaya, matrilineal system is a rare, ancient societal structure among the Khasi, Garo and Jaintia tribes, where lineage and inheritance pass through the mother. Children take their mother’s surname, the youngest daughter inherits the property (is the custodian of ancestral property) and the husband often moves into the wife’s house. The system is believed to have originated from an agrarian society and the need to protect the family structure, ensuring women’s economic security, social stability and the preservation of tribal identity. Infact, in the Khasi community, women have more independence than women in many patriarchal communities, including the freedom to select their partners, remarry without shame and take an active role in public places like market place and businesses. It is in this background that this Court would have to consider a case seeking quashing of a POCSO case by consent, keeping in mind all factors, including the girl’s (victim’s) and her child’s social security, by ensuring that she and the child get the benefit of the government schemes, including under the POCSO Act. 34. Thus, from the aforesaid discussion, quashing of a POCSO case under Section 528 BNSS by consent, is permissible even if it is a special statute and there is no specific exclusion of any present law/custom. However, the said discretion has to be used with due care and caution and circumspection in exceptional cases, to do justice. As noted earlier, there cannot be any straitjacket formula as to in which cases the said discretion can or cannot be exercised, inasmuch as, that would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case i.e., the age of the parties coming before the court; whether the consent given by the victim is an informed consent and not under coercion of the family members or the boy; that the victim and the accused are married and have a child or are living together as husband and wife, as per the customs in the State of Meghalaya, etc. Where parties are living together as 2026:MLHC:356 husband and wife or are married, a police report, or a report from any authority, be called for, verifying the said claim. Also, while considering whether the consent of the victim is an ‘informed consent’, it is necessary that the victim places her affidavit on record giving her ‘No Objection’ to the quashing of the case. That, before such an affidavit is accepted, in order to ensure that the consent is an informed consent, the victim may be sent before the Secretary, MLSA or Secretary, DLSA to ascertain whether the consent is an informed consent, by giving her time to ponder over the same; and a report be called for, before such quashing petition is considered. While quashing the case, the Government schemes that may be available to a victim in a POCSO Act and the child born from the said relationship also be given due weightage as suggested and directed by the Apex Court in the case of Re: Right to Privacy of Adolescents (supra). 35. No doubt, we are conscious of the fact that a case under POCSO Act, is not a case against an individual, but is an offence against the society as a whole, however, the administration or enforcement of the law cannot be divorced from lived realities. Rendering justice demands not only that the law be applied with precision, but also that it be tempered with fairness, compassion and empathy when the situation/facts of a case, warrant it. Thus, it is necessary to maintain a fine balance between the competing interests of justice, deterrence and rehabilitation. Where the victim and the boy are married or are living together as husband and wife (and recognised), and have a child/children, sending the boy to jail would not serve the cause of justice, rather it would cause great injustice to the victim and the child born from the said consensual relationship, as ultimately, the aim of the law is to do justice. Thus, in cases where the court comes to the conclusion, that the consent given by the victim is a genuine and informed consent and that it would be greater injustice to send the boy to jail, instead of letting the parties live together as one family, the Court may consider 2026:MLHC:356 quashing the case, pending trial, keeping in mind what is stated aforesaid. We may note, considering the large number of POCSO cases, in particular Romeo – Juliet cases, it is the responsibility of the State Government to create awareness amongst the people, including the children about the provisions of the POCSO Act, its punishment, etc., not only in the cities but also in the interior and remote places, including schools, colleges, etc.” 9. Hence, having regard to what is observed in the aforesaid judgment, the report of the Secretary, High Court Legal Service Committee, the consent of the respondent No.4; the fact that the petitioner and the respondent No.4 are married and have a child aged 3 years, there is no purpose in continuing with the proceeding qua the petitioner. It appears that the consent given by the respondent No.4 is an informed consent and that she has no objection to the quashing of the proceeding. 10. Thus, in view of the aforesaid, the FIR bearing P.S. Case No.143 (11) of 2022 under Sections 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 registered with Madanriting Police Station and consequently, the proceeding pending before the learned Special Judge (POCSO), East Khasi Hills, Shillong being Special POCSO Case No.46 of 2025 are quashed and set aside. 2026:MLHC:356 11. Needless to state that the respondent No.4 and the child be extended all benefits as may be applicable to them i.e., the Schemes from either the State or Central Government, which are as under; (i) Scheme for Care and Support to Victims of under Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act (exclusively for POCSO victims) [Nirbhaya Fund]; (ii) Mission Vatsalya Scheme (Child Protection Services); (iii) Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao (BBBP) Scheme; (iv) Meghalaya Victim Compensation Scheme, 2022; (v) Meghalaya Health Insurance Scheme; (vi) Ayushman Bharat-PM-JAY (free health); (vii) Mission 1000 Days-Meghalaya; (viii) Rashtriya Bal Swasthya Karyakram (RBSK); (ix) Chief Minister’s Safe Motherhood Scheme or CM-SMS; (x) Special Training Programme for age-appropriate admission of Out of School Children (OoSC) and Back to School Campaign; (xi) Samagra Siksha (Back to School); (xii) NALSA (Child-Friendly Legal Services for Children) Scheme 2024; (xiii) NALSA (Legal Services to Persons with Mental Illness and Persons with intellectual Disabilities) Scheme, 2024; and (xiv) Mission Shakti-Women’s Safety, Support and Empowerment. (xv) Insurance or any other scheme. 2026:MLHC:356 Needless to also state, that since the respondent No.4 intends to continue with her education, the Scheme ‘Back to School’ be offered to the respondent No.4 or in the alternative, some vocational training as sought for by her be given to her. 12. In order to enable the respondent No.4 to get the benefits of the above said schemes, the DCPO, East Khasi Hills District, Shillong as well as the Secretary, DLSA, East Khasi Hills District, Shillong are directed to ensure that the benefits as may be applicable to the respondent No.4 and the child are made available to them at the earliest and in any event within eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order. 13. A compliance report of the benefits extended to the respondent No.4 and the child be placed before this Court on the next date. 14. The Registry to forward forthwith a copy of this order to both, the Member Secretary, Meghalaya State Legal Services Authority and the Commissioner and Secretary, Social Welfare 2026:MLHC:356 Department, Shillong to enable them to take steps and ensures compliance of the order. 15. Rule is made absolute on the aforesaid terms. 16. The petition is allowed and disposed of on the aforesaid terms. 17. Stand over to 10th June, 2026 for recording compliance. (Revati Mohite Dere) Chief Justice Meghalaya 15.04.2026 “Lam DR-PS” 2026:MLHC:356 Digitally signed by LAMPHRANG KHARCHANDY Date: 2026.04.18 15:32:01 IST