Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:18330 Court No. - 78 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 17507 of 2023 Applicant :- Riyasuddin And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Hasan Parvej Counsel for Opposite Party :- Aman Kumar,G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Hasan Parvej, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri V.D. Ojha, learned counsel for the State and perused the records. 3. Sri Aman Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 is not present. 4. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants - Riyasuddin, Riyazuddin and Sakruddin, with the prayer to allow the present application and quash the impugned charge sheet & cognizance order dated 19.12.2022 & 03.01.2023 respectively as well as entire proceeding of pending Special Case No. 01 of 2023 (State vs. Riyasuddin and others), under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 376-D, 354/354A I.P.C., Section 5/6, 7/8 POCSO Act, Section 3/4 D.P. Act & Section 3/4 Muslim Marriage Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Bareilly, arising out of Case Crime no. 119 of 2022, pending in the Court of Special Judge POCSO Act / Additional Session Judge, District Bareilly. 5. In compliance of the Court's order dated 15.07.2024, the trial court concerned has verified the compromise entered into between the parties and sent compliance report dated 23.08.2024 to this Court which is on record. 6. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that since the compromise between the parties have been verified by the trial court concerned vide order dated 29.07.2024, the proceedings of the present case be quashed. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant relies upon an order dated 10.04.2023 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl. Misc. Application 482 Cr.P.C. No. 832 of 2017 (Gireesh @ Vikas Vs. State of U.P. and another) : 2023:AHC:76048 and submits that in an identical circumstances, the said Bench has quashed the criminal proceedings of the case. 8. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for quashing. 9. Be that as it may, the law as has been culled out by the Apex Court in matters of such nature. 10. In so far as the proceedings under the POCSO Act is concerned, the same cannot be quashed in view of the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of In Re: Right to Privacy of Adolescents [Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3 of 2023] decided on 20.08.2024 paragraph 22, 23 & 23.1. Further, the Apex Court in the case of Ramji Lal Bairwa & Another Vs. State of Rajasthan & Others: [Criminal Appeal No. 3403 of 2023 @ SLP (Crl.) No. 12912 of 2022] decided on 07.11.2024 held that offence under the POCSO Act is heinous offence and not of private nature and hence the same cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise. Further, this Court in the case of Sanjeev Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and 03 Others: Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:56128 in Application U/S 482 9169 of 2024 has also observed that offence under the POCSO Act cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise. 11. Looking to the facts of the matter, the limited argument on behalf of the applicant and the judgements of the Apex Court in the case of In Re: Right to Privacy of Adolescents (supra), Ramji Lal Bairwa & Another (supra) and Sanjeev Kumar (supra), as the proceedings of the present case are under the POCSO Act also, the same cannot be quashed. 12. The present petition is devoid of any merits and is accordingly, rejected. 13. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. 14. Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned court within three weeks from today. 15. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (Samit Gopal,J.) Order Date :- 6.2.2025 / Manoj Digitally signed by :- MANOJ KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad