Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:1222 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32347 of 2024 Applicant :- Bittu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Aditi Srivastava,Chandra Bhushan Prasad,Kandarp Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sushil Kumar Pandey Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. 1. Heard Mr. Kandarp Srivastava, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Sushil Kumar Pandey, the learned counsel representing first informant-opposite party-2. 2. Perused the record. 3. Applicant- Bittu, has approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the charge sheet/police dated 20.06.2024 submitted by the Investigating Officer in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. in Case Crime No. 80 of 2024 under Sections 363, 376(3), 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 The Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Khatauli, District Muzaffar Nagar, the cognizance taking order/summoning order dated 04.07.2024 passed by Special Additional District and Session Judge (POCSO Act), Muzaffar Nagar in Case No. 1701 of 2024 ( State Vs. Bittu), under Sections 363, 376(3), 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 The Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Khatauli, District Muzaffar Nagar. 4. Learned counsel for applicant that subsequent to the FIR dated 27.02.2024 lodged by first informant opposite party-2 and giving rise to present criminal proceedings, the prosecutrix has solemnized marriage with applicant. From the aforesaid wedlock a male child was born. The prosecutrix is now residing with the applicant as his legally wedded wife. As such, the criminality if any, committed by applicant now stands washed off. The bona fide of the parties is further explicit from the fact that the application filed in support of present application has been sworn by the prosecutrix herself. On the basis of above, the learned counsel for applicant submits that no useful purpose shall be served in prolonging the criminal prosecution of applicant. In case the criminal prosecution of applicant is allowed to continue, a happy family shall stand broken. He therefore, contends that present application is liable to be allowed. 5. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party-1 has opposed the present application. He submits that since the prosecutrix was a child within the meaning of the term defined in terms of the POCSO Act, therefore, irrespective of the subsequent developments the criminality committed by applicant shall now stand washed off. As such, no interference is warranted by this Court in present application. However, the submissions urged by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to this application has been adopted by the learned counsel representing first informant opposite party-2. 6. At this juncture, the learned counsel for applicant invited the attention of Court to the averments made in supplementary affidavit filed by him in Court today. On the basis of above, he therefore, contends that factual submissions urged by him in support of this application are clearly discernible from the material brought on record by means of aforementioned supplementary affidavit. As per reiterated that this application is therefore, liable to be allowed. 7. Having heard, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party-1, the learned counsel representing first informant opposite party-2 and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that it is evident from the record that subsequent to the FIR giving rise to present criminal proceedings, the prosecutrix has solemnized marriage with the applicant. From the aforesaid wedlock a male child was born as is evident from the birth certificate of the new born child, the copy of which is on record at page 12 of the supplementary affidavit. The prosecutrix is now said to be residing with the applicant as his legally wedded wife. On the above conspectus, this Court finds that in case, impugned criminal proceedings are allowed to prolong no useful purpose shall be served in prolonging the criminal prosecution of applicant, in case the criminal prosecution of applicant is allowed to continue, a happy family shall stand broken. 8. In view of the discussion made above, the present application succeeds and is liable to be allowed. 9. It is, accordingly, allowed. 10. The entire proceedings of Case No. 1701 of 2024 ( State Vs. Bittu), arising out of Case Crime No. 80 of 2024, under Sections 363, 376(3), 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 The Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Khatauli, District Muzaffar Nagar, now pending in the Court of Special Additional District and Session Judge (POCSO Act), Muzaffar Nagar are, hereby, quashed. 11. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the cost is made easy. Order Date :- 3.1.2025 Imtiyaz Digitally signed by :- IMTIYAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad