Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:87911 Court No. - 76 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22118 of 2024 Applicant :- Sanoj Kureel Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ved Prakash Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kalpana Singh Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J. 1. Heard Mr. Ved Prakash Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant; Ms. Kalpana Singh, learned counsel for the private opposite party no. 2; and the learned AGA for the State, and perused the record. 2. The present application has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the charge sheet dated 10.09.2017 bearing C.S. No. A-340/2017 and cognizance order dated 23.09.2017 as well as the entire proceedings arising therefrom in Special Sessions Trial No. 165 of 2017, State v. Sanoj Kureel, pursuant to Case Crime No. 555 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Ghatampur, District Kanpur Nagar, pending before the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No. 13, Kanpur Dehat. 3. The principal ground urged by learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant and the prosecutrix have solemnized marriage and are presently living together as husband and wife, with two children born out of the said wedlock. 4. In response, learned counsel for the private opposite party and the learned AGA for the State submit that the applicant has allegedly solemnized marriage with his niece, which is in contravention of personal law, prevailing customs, and provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Furthermore, the prosecutrix was a minor at the time of the incident, attracting the provisions of the POCSO Act, which is a special statute enacted to protect children from sexual offences and does not permit compounding of such offences on the basis of subsequent marriage. 5. This Court is mindful of the fact that the POCSO Act is a welfare legislation enacted to safeguard the rights of minors, and any compromise or settlement between the parties, particularly in cases involving serious allegations such as rape or sexual assault on a minor, cannot be permitted to override the statutory intent or to frustrate the administration of justice. 6. The Supreme Court in several judgments has consistently held that offences under the POCSO Act and those involving sexual offences against minors are of serious nature and cannot be quashed merely on the basis of a subsequent settlement or compromise, especially when the same is in derogation of established legal norms. 7. In view of the above and upon consideration of the totality of facts and circumstances, this Court finds no ground to exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the proceedings. 8. The instant application is devoid of merits and is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 23.5.2025 A.N. Mishra (Vinod Diwakar,J.) Digitally signed by :- AMARNATH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- AMARNATH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad