MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Minor Girl Was Living As Happily Wife Of Accused - POSCO Case Quashed: Meghalaya HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Meghalaya High Court recently quashed a FIR and criminal proceedings initiated against a man booked under the POCSO Act and IPC after noting that the accused and the victim-wife, a minor, were married.

According to the Bench of Justice W Diengdoh, even though the POCSI Act punishes sexual penetration of a minor, justice would not be served if the court did not consider other factors, such as consensual sex within the bond of marriage.

In this case, petitioner no.1 (the husband) lived with petitioner no.2 (the wife), who is the informant's daughter, as husband and wife, and despite the fact that the wife was a minor, both families approved of the relationship.

The husband brought his pregnant wife to the hospital when she became pregnant. As the wife was a minor, the hospital authorities notified the police after the pregnancy was confirmed.

The police visited the wife's residence and convinced her to file a FIR. Consequently, the wife filed a police report, and the husband was charged under Section 5(j)(ii)q/6 of the POCSO Act.

Later, however, the husband and wife jointly petitioned the High Court to dismiss the FIR.

The couple argued before the court that they were unaware of the law and were living happily as husband and wife. Further, it was stated that because the husband was the family's breadwinner, the family will face great hardships if the case against him is allowed to continue.

The court noted, after hearing the parties' arguments, that the wife does not believe her husband's actions constitute a violation of the POCSO Act.

According to the court, this is a case in which a minor girl was living with a man as his wife with the consent of both families, and she would only have to witness her husband being prosecuted because she is under the age of eighteen.

The court noted that the victim was only five months shy of her 18th birthday when the case was filed, and therefore justice will not be served by prosecuting the husband.

Therefore, the court granted the petitioner-Section husband's 482 CrPC motion and dismissed the POCSO Act FIR and proceedings.

D.D:19-07-2022

Olius Mawiong & Another Versus State of Meghalaya &b Anr

Latest Legal News