HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 27889 of 2025 Court No. - 79 HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J. 1. Heard Sri Manish Joshi, learned counsel the applicant, Sri Sudhakar Yadav, learned counsel for informant-opposite party no.4 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State. None appeared for opposite party nos. 2 and 3. Perused the record. 2. The instant application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been moved with a prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings of Special Case No.1437 of 2022 (State Vs. Mayur) as well as charge sheet dated 06.05.2022 and cognizance order dated 01.07.2022, arising out of Case Crime No.13 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Dilari, District Moradabad, pending before the court of Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No.1, Moradabad on the basis of compromise dated 12.07.2025. 3. Sri Sudhakar Yadav, learned counsel for opposite party no.4 has handed over the counter affidavit annexing therewith the compromise entered into between the parties. The same is taken on record. 4. On 11.08. 2025, this Court has observed that there is compromise entered into between the parties. Paragraph nos. 1 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manish Joshi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Sudhakar Yadav Mayur .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) and 2 reiterated as below: "1. Sri Manish Joshi, learned counsel for the applicant appears and submits that the F.I.R. has been registered against the accused-applicant by the father of wife of the applicant who are living as husband and wife. It is further submitted that the parties have entered into a compromise. The copy of the compromise is annexed at page 87 as Annexure-13 to the affidavit filed in support of the application. 2. Sri Sudhakar Yadav, learned counsel for the informant-opposite party no.4 concedes that there is a compromise between the parties and he may file counter affidavit annexing therewith copy of the compromise on the next date." 5. It is submitted that the applicant and victim have married, having a child. 6. The Apex Court in the case of K. Dhandapani Vs. State by the Inspector of Police (2022 SCC Online SC 1056) has set aside the conviction and sentence of the accused affirmed by the High Court in the matter of POCSO Act considering that the accused and victim are living happily in their married life and held that "This Court cannot shut its eyes to the ground reality and disturb the happy family life of the appellant and the prosecutrix". 7. The Apex Court in another case of Mafat Lal and another Vs. The State of Rajasthan (2022) 6 SCC 589 has quashed the F.I.R. and consequential proceedings of offence U/s 363, 366 I.P.C. considering the marriage of accused and victim. 8. There is no point in getting the trial continued, when the parties have buried their differences as the star witness would not support the prosecution case. 9. Thus, the charge sheet and the proceeding arose out of case crime number mentioned above is hereby quashed. Consequently, the proceedings of trial also quashed. NA528 No. 27889 of 2025 2 10. The application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is allowed accordingly. September 9, 2025 MN/- NA528 No. 27889 of 2025 3 (Avnish Saxena,J.) Digitally signed by :- MAHENDRA NATH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad