Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010125692026 2026:GAU-AS:12232 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./889/2026 AKHIRUZ ZAMAN ALIAS FIROZ ZAMAN AND 3 ORS. S/O ABU TAHER SK, VILLAGEKATDANGA SATDUBI PT-I, P.S. SOUTH SALMARA, DISTRICTSOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR, ASSAM, PIN- 783127. 2: MAMUNI BEGUM W/O AKHIRUZ ZAMAN FIROZ ZAMAN VILLAGEKATDANGA SATDUBI PT-I P.S. SOUTH SALMARA DISTRICTSOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN783127. 3: ABU TAHER SK S/O LATE JOSIMUDDIN VILLAGEKATDANGA SATDUBI PT-I P.S. SOUTH SALMARA DISTRICTSOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN783127. 4: JOYNAL MONDAL @ JOYNAL AB EDIN S/O LATE ELAHI VILL- KATDANGA SATDUBI PT.I P.S. SOUTH SALMARA DIST. SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN-78312 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Page No.# 2/7 2:ABU SIDDIQUE S/O KOYER ALI VILL- KATDANGA KOLABARI P.S. SOUTH SALMARA DIST. SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN-78312 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A Z AHMED, MR. A KHALEK Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. M HUSSAIN(R2) BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS O R D E R 26.08.2026 Heard Mr. A. Z. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P.S. Lahkar, learned Addl. P.P. for the State respondent. 2. Invoking provisions of Section 528 B.N.S.S., 2023, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the Special (POCSO) Case No. 212/2024, arising out of South Salmara P.S. Case No. 42/2023, registered under Sections 9/10/11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, read with Sections 6/17 of the POCSO Act, 2012, pending before the Court of the learned Special Judge, South Salmara, Mankachar. 3. The case was registered based on an FIR dated 02.02.2023 lodged by the V.D.P. Secretary alleging that the victim girl in question was forced into child marriage with the petitioner no.1, herein. The petitioner no.1 is Page No.# 3/7 the person who had contracted the said marriage; petitioner no.2 is stated to be the alleged victim girl, who was married to petitioner no.1; the petitioner no.3 is the father of the boy; the petitioner no. 4 is stated to be father of petitioner no. 2 (the alleged victim girl). 4. The investigation of the case resulted in a charge-sheet and subsequent registration of the aforesaid special case wherein, cognizance was taken by the order dated 29.10.2024. It is submitted that the case is presently at the stage of trial, which however is not yet completed. 5. It is contended that in the meantime the alleged victim girl had filed an affidavit, in which, she stated that she was never forced to marry with the petitioner no. 1 and that, pursuant to her love affair with him, she eloped with him and subsequently, marriage was solemnized in the presence of guardian. It is further stated in the affidavit that at the time of the marriage she was a major but the informant/VDP secretary lodged the FIR without verifying her documents. It is stated in the FIR that due to the ongoing proceedings she has suffered agony and seeks an end of the case. In the backdrop of the aforesaid circumstances, she has also joined as petitioner no.2 in this petition seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings. Her present age is indicated as 22 years in the affidavit. The paragraph nos. 3 and 4 of the affidavit may be reproduced herein below:- “3.That I had never been forced to marry with my nusband Akhiruz Zaman @ Firoz Zaman from any one and actually I had love affair with my Akhiruz Zaman @ Firoz Zaman and out of love and affection I wilfully eloped with him and thereafter our marriage was solemnized in presence of our guardians 4. That at the time of marriage I was major and the VDP Secretary Page No.# 4/7 without verifying my documents lodged the FIR. At present I have been suffering from mental trauma and agony due to continuation of the instant case and I want to seek an end of the instant case and I have no objection if the Hon'ble High Court quash the instant proceeding considering my happy conjugal life.” 6. It is also submitted that the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 also have a child which was born on 21.03.2023, who is stated to be aged more than 3 years at present. 7. The learned counsel for the Informant supports the prayer for quashing. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the informant that the FIR was lodged on the instruction of the then OC, the jurisdictional police station. 8. The petitioner no. 2 stated to be the wife and the alleged victim woman has filed an additional affidavit in this petition, bringing on record an affidavit made by petitioner nos.3 and 4, being her father-in-law and father respectively stating that she has been living with her husband peacefully and that they also have no objection to quashing of the matter. The respective paragraph no. 5 of the two affidavits may be reproduced herein below:- “(5) That since my son and Mamuni Begum have been living happily as husband and wife and out of their wedlock one female child was born and both the family members are happy with their conjugal life and as such I humbly pray that the proceeding of Special (P) Case No.212/2024 pending in the Court of Special Judge, South Salmara-Mankachar may be set aside and washed in the interest of justice.” “(5) That since my daughter has been living with her husband happily and out of their wedlock one female child was born and both the family members are happy with their conjugal life and as such I humbly pray that the proceeding of Specail (P) Case Page No.# 5/7 No.212/2024 pending in the Court of Special Judge, South Salmara-Mankachar may be set aside and quashed in the interest of justice.” 9. The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court being K. Kirubakaran Vs. State of Tamil Nadu in Criminal Appeal No.679/2024 and also a decision of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl. Pet. No. 812/2025 (Sapiyel Hoque @ Sapial Hoque and Anr Vs. State of Assam and Anr.). In K. Kirubakaran (supra), the Hon’ble Apex Court was pleased to quash the proceedings in a situation where the appellant and the alleged victim were married with a male child aged 1 year and leading a stable conjugal life. The relevant paragraph nos.6 and 9 may be reproduced herein below:- “(6) We are conscious of the fact that a crime is not merely a wrong against an individual but against society as a whole. When an offence is committed, it wounds the collective conscience of the society and therefore the society, acting through its elected lawmakers, determines what would be the punishment for such an offence and how an offender should be dealt with, to deter its recurrence. The criminal law is, thus, a manifestation of the sovereign will of the society. However, the administration of such law is not divorced from the practical realities. Rendering justice demands a nuanced approach. This Court tailors its decisions to the specifics of each case: with firmness and severity wherever necessary and it is merciful when warranted. It is also in the best interest of society to bring a dispute to an end, wherever possible. We draw inspiration from Cardozo, J. to hold that the law aims to ensure not just punishment of the guilty, but also harmony and restoration of the social order. 9. Per the law made by the legislature, the appellant having been found guilty of a heinous offence, the proceedings in the present case on the basis of a compromise between the appellant and his wife cannot be quashed. But ignoring the cry of the appellant’s wife for compassion and empathy will not, in our opinion, serve the ends of justice. Even the most serious offenders of law do receive justice Page No.# 6/7 moderated by compassion from the courts, albeit in appropriate cases. Given the peculiar facts and circumstances here, a balanced approach combining practicality and empathy is necessary. The appellant and the victim are not only legally married, they are also in their family way. While considering the offence committed by the appellant punishable under the POCSO Act, we have discerned that the crime was not the result of lust but love. The victim of crime herself has expressed her desire to live a peaceful and stable family life with the appellant, upon whom she is dependent, without the appellant carrying the indelible mark on his forehead of being an offender. Continuation of the criminal proceedings and the appellant’s incarceration would only disrupt this familial unit and cause irreparable harm to the victim, the infant child, and the fabric of society itself.” 10. In Sapiyel Hoque @ Sapial Hoque (supra) at Coordinate Bench was also pleased to quash criminal proceeding registered under POCSO Act and child marriage Act in the context of the couple leading a peaceful conjugal life with children. The law regarding quashing pursuant to settlement is well settled (Reference Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab 2012 (10) SCC 303; Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab, 2014 6 SCC 466, State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan, 2019 5 SCC 688. 11. Though the power of quashing is available to quash non- compoundable offences as well but certain exceptions have been carved out by the Honourable Apex Court pertaining to offences of a heinous nature having societal impact. Ordinarily criminal proceeding under the POCSO Act would not be amenable to quashing pursuant to settlement. However, in certain peculiar facts and circumstances, a further exception may also be made in a situation where the Court is convinced that allowing the criminal proceedings to continue may not be in the best interest of the couple and their children. For example in a situation, where Page No.# 7/7 the accused and the alleged victim girl are already married, have children and leading a stable conjugal life. 12. In the present case, the alleged victim girl has joined as a petitioner seeking quashing of the criminal proceeding. She has stated on affidavit that she married the main accused pursuant to a love affair at a time when she was a major and that case was lodged without verifying her documents. The other two affidavits are also noticed as discussed above. 13. In the given facts and circumstances, upon perusing the materials and considering the submissions, this Court is persuaded to allowed this petition and quash the proceedings. Accordingly to the criminal proceedings of Special (POCSO) Case No. 212/2024, arising out of South Salmara P.S. Case No. 42/2023, registered under Sections 9/10/11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, read with Sections 6/17 of the POCSO Act, 2012, pending before the Court of the learned Special Judge, South Salmara, Mankachar stands quashed in the larger interest of justice and specially keeping in mind the interest of the minor child of petitioner Nos. 1 and 2. 14. Accordingly, the instant criminal petition stands allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant