Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010045642026 2026:GAU-AS:3495 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./329/2026 SAJEN ALI AND ANR S/O- NOZRUL ISLAM, R/O- VILL- DUMORTOLA, P.O- RADHAMADHAB HAT, P.S- MANKACHAR, DIST.- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR, ASSAM, PIN- 783131 2: HASHORANI BEGUM W/O- SAJEN ALI D-O- HASEN ALI R/O- VILL- DUMORTOLA P.O- RADHAMADHAB HAT P.S- MANKACHAR DIST- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN- 783131 3: HASEN ALI S/O- LT AJIAL HOQUE R/O- VILL- DUMORTOLA P.O- RADHAMADHAB HAT P.S- MANKACHAR DIST- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN- 78313 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED PP, ASSAM 2:NUR AMIN SARKAR S/O- LT KHALIL UDDIN SARKAR Page No.# 2/5 R/O- VILL - CHARBARI P.O- PURAN DIARA P.S- MANKACHAR DIST.- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN- 78313 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M R KHANDAKAR, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 10.03.2026 Heard Mr. M R Khamdakar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K K Parashar, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. The three petitioners herein stated to be husband and wife namely, Sajen Ali, Hashorani Beguma and Hasen Ali, have jointly invoked the jurisdiction under 528 BNSS seeking quashing of the entire criminal proceeding of Special (P) Case No. 34/2024 arising out of Mankachar P.S Case No. 385/2023 under Section 9/10/11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act R/W Section 6/17 of POCSO Act, earlier pending before the learned Special Judge, South Salmara, Mankachar and presently before the learned CJM, South Salmara. 3. The Investigating Officer, after completion of investigation of the case, had Page No.# 3/5 submitted the charge-sheet vide Charge Sheet No. 641, dated 31.12.2023 before the learned Court below in connection with the aforesaid Mankachar P.S. Case No. 385/2023 under Section 9/10 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, against the petitioner Nos. 1 & 3 namely Sajen Ali and Hasen Ali. Accordingly, a case has been registered vide Special(P) Case No. 84/2024 before the learned Special Judge, South Salmara Mankachar, Assam. 4. The Special Court declined to frame charge under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and sent back the matter to the CJM, South Salmara. 5. The court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, South Salmara Mankachar, after receiving the case record from the court of learned Special Judge, South Salmara Mankachar has registered a new PRC Case No. 262/2025. 6. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the girl is now a major and pursuant to their earlier marriage, they also have a minor child. Learned counsel has also drawn my attention to the affidavit dated 27.12.2025 filed by the petitioner No.2 as the deponent in which she stated about her love affair and marriage with the petitioner No.1 and that now she is living peacefully with him and her child from the wedlock. Page No.# 4/5 7. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted before this Court two decisions of the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Petition 156/2025. It is submitted that in similar circumstances, this Court was pleased to quash the proceedings. 8. The law regarding quashing of criminal proceeding pursuant to settlement between the parties has crystallized through a catena of decisions rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. However, as per the governing law, certain categories are excluded which includes heinous offence having great societal impact. 9. In the instant case, the provision of Child Marriage Act has been given and the said law has been enacted to criminalize the social evil of marrying of girls before attaining their majority. 10. However, the objective reality that has emerged in the facts and circumstances of the instant case, also cannot be overlooked. The parties are married, living a peaceful conjugal life and they also have a minor son. In the said situation, allowing the trial to proceed might be an exercise in futility. Even otherwise, such a continuing prosecution could be detrimental to the interest of the child and the victim girl herself in the objective situation. Page No.# 5/5 11. Therefore, in the peculiar facts and circumstances, despite the provisions of the Child Marriage Act, it would be justified to exercise the power under Section 528 BNSS to allow the prayer of the petitioners, who are interestingly both the accused and the victim jointly praying to quash the proceeding. 12. Consequently, allowing this criminal petition, the entire proceeding of – PRC Case No. 262/2025 arising out of Mankachar P.S Case No. 385/2023 under Section 9/10/11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act shall stand quashed. 13. Accordingly, the criminal petition stands allowed and disposed of on the JUDGE Comparing Assistant