This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking quashing of FIR registered against the petitioner vide Crime No.286/2022 at Police Station Industrial Area Satalpur, District Raisen, for the offence punishable under Sections 363 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 / 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

2. A succinct portrayal of the prosecution case is that on 30.11.2022, the complainant made a missing report at Police Station Industrial Area Satalpur alleging there that her daughter had been missing and is untraceable. On that basis, a complaint was registered and then the prosecutrix was recovered and upon her statement made to the police, the FIR got lodged for the aforesaid offences.

3. Although, the counsel for the parties have submitted that they have moved applications under Section 320 of Cr.P.C. for compounding the offence for the reason that the petitioner and the prosecutrix have entered into marriage. Although, it is stated by them that at the time of registering of offence, it was Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANIL CHOUDHARY Signing time: 3/27/2025 10:44:34 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:14908 2 MCRC-9291-2025 alleged that the complainant was minor but the prosecutrix herself stated before the Court that after attaining the age of majority, she entered into marriage with the petitioner and they are leading a happy life as husband and wife. As such, they submitted that in the light of law laid down by this Court in number of cases that even in case of non-compoundable offence, the Court can compound the case in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the application for compounding the offence be allowed.

4. Considering the aforesaid and the fact that the statement of the parties has already recorded before the Registry in which they have admitted that the prosecutrix and the petitioner have entered into marriage, I find that it would be in the interest of justice to set free the petitioner from prosecution so that the married couple can lead a happy married life. This Court in a case of Saurabh Sahu Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and others (M.Cr.C. No.21142 of 2024) has observed as under:-

Prosecutrix has two children out of the wedlock with accused.

11. Be that as it may.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:14908 3 MCRC-9291-2025

12. Fact remains that petitioner and respondent No.2 are married couple and both are living in same household where prosecutrix is living with her two children. It is regular and easy to be retributive but at the same time a Judge has to sublimely feel the pulse of the case. One cannot forget that "Every "F I L E" with same alphabets, contains a "L I F E". (See : In Re State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pankaj Mishra , 2021 SCC OnLine MP 5480 and Geeta Paliwal and others Vs. Sitaram and others reported as 2023 SCC 5 Online MP

13. Here "FILE" before this Court carries not only a "LIFE" but many LIVES.

14. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case I.A.No.8492/2024 and I.A. No.8493/2024 are hereby allowed and parties are permitted to compound the offence.

15. Therefore, this Court under the obtaining facts and circumstances of the case intends to tread on the path of reformative or atleast other than retributive one because:-

Prosecutrix is living peacefully with her husband. In case of any punishment, petitioner may have to go to jail and that would disrupt the family forever.

(iv) Petitioner does not have any previous criminal background so as to infer any mischief at this juncture. Therefore, keeping this spirit, this Court intends to inject "L Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANIL CHOUDHARY Signing time: 3/27/2025 10:44:34 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:14908 4 MCRC-9291-2025 I F E" into this "F I L E" in the interest of justice.

16. Resultantly, the petition is allowed. FIR registered at Crime No.849/2019 at Police Station Bahodapura, District Gwalior for the offence punishable under Sections 376(3) , 376 (2i) , 376 (2) (n) of IPC and Section 5(l) read with 6 of POCSO Act against the petitioner is hereby quashed. All the consequential proceedings flowing out of the said FIR including S.T. No.276/2021 pending before the Court of learned Special Judge (POCSO) Act, Gwalior against the petitioner also stands quashed. Petitioner is set free. But an expectation can certainly be raised by this Court that petitioner/accused and prosecutrix shall live peacefully and would try to attain nuptial bliss so that family and social harmony can be maintained.

Over and above, in M.Cr.C No.3853/2024 ( Shivam @ Siddarth v. The State of Madhya pradesh & Anr.) vide order dated 13.02.2024, the coordinate bench at Indore has observed as under:-

The Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Anr. reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 after considering the provisions of section 320 and 482 of the Cr.P.C held that the compounding can he permitted in a non-compoundable offence. Relevant part of the order of the order reads as under:

8. In Yogendra Yadav 's case (supra), charges were under Sections 307 & 326 IPC. The apex Court was of the view that the High Court could have exercised its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. because parties have amicably settled the dispute and the case did not pertain to an offence of moral turpitude or grave offences like rape, murder etc.

9. In the case of Ramgopla & Anr. vs. State of MP (Criminal Appeal No.1489/2012, decided on September 29, 2021), the Apex Court held in para 12 as under :-

10. In the case of State of M.P. vs. Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688, a Three Judge Bench of the Apex Court discussed the earlier judgments of the Apex Court and laid down the principles in para-15. The relevant para-15.1 & 15.2 are Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANIL CHOUDHARY Signing time: 3/27/2025 10:44:34 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:14908 8 MCRC-9291-2025 reproduced as under:-

9 MCRC-9291-2025 also placed the judgment passed by Delhi High Court in W.P. (CRL) No. 223/2016 ( Tarun Rana vs. State ) and also order dated 01.05.2018 passed in CRM-M No.6056/2018 ( Shkhbir Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab and Anr. ). In para 12 of the judgment in the case of Tarun Rana (supra) it has been held that the offence under Section 66(1) / 67 of the Information Technology Act is not compoundable being of serious nature, however, if the Court feels that continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in this case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored, it can order for quashing of the FIR or criminal proceedings as it is the duty of the Court to prevent continuation of unnecessary judicial process.

Indubitably, the petitioner and prosecutrix are major and they have entered into marriage and they have also admitted that when the complainant was below 18 years of age, they were in love- affair and out of premonition they had doubt about green- signaling of their relationship by their parents, so they eloped. Even after registration of the offence, their relationship continued and finally they stepped into the wedlock in the month of February, 2024. They got married and ever since are living as husband and wife leading a married life with serenity. Taking into the account the fact that the prosecutrix is major now and appears mentally sound to comprehend her well-being and simultaneously looking to their future prospects, I find that if the prosecution is allowed to continue and eventually if the petitioner is convicted by the trial Court, it would ruin their life. Quite apart, in the statement recorded before the trial Court, the prosecutrix did not support the case of the prosecution and utterly stated that whatever had happened it was consensual. In view of the above discourse and to meet the ends of justice, I allow the petition. Accordingly, the FIR registered against the Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANIL CHOUDHARY Signing time: 3/27/2025 10:44:34 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:14908 10 MCRC-9291-2025 petitioner vide Crime No.350/2021 at Police Station Chhapara, District Seoni for the punishable under Section 363 , 366 , 376 , 376(3) , 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 3(1) (w-i), 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act and Section 3 , 4 , 5L , 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 is hereby quashed.

Needless to emphasise that all subsequent proceedings arose from the FIR, would automatically cease to proceed. Petition is allowed and disposed of. "