Meghalaya High Court
2. Victim vs 2. Smti. Phinsina Warjri on 6 July, 2026
2026:MLHC:682
Serial No.05
Daily List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
Crl.Petn.No.68/2026
Date of Order: 06.07.2026
1. Shri Jefferson Sun
2. Victim ..... Petitioners
Vs.
1. The State of Meghalaya, represented by the Station House
Officer, PS Rynjah, Government of Meghalaya, Shillong.
2. Smti. Phinsina Warjri ..... Respondents
Coram:
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Revati Mohite Dere, Chief Justice
Appearance:
For the Petitioners : Ms. S Nongsiej, Adv
For the Respondents : Mr. H. Kharmih, Addl.PP
Ms. C.R. Marak, Adv for R/2
i) Whether approved for reporting in No
Law journals etc.:
ii) Whether approved for publication
in press: Yes
JUDGMENT:
(Oral)
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith with the consent
of the parties and the aforesaid petition is taken up for final
disposal.
Page 1 of 12
2026:MLHC:682
3. By this petition, preferred under Section 528 of the BNSS,
the petitioners i.e., petitioner No.1 (original accused) and
petitioner No.2 (prosecutrix), seek quashing of the FIR registered
with the Rynjah Police Station, East Khasi Hills District, being
PS Case No.19 (02) 2023, dated 17th February, 2023, qua the
petitioner at the behest of the respondent No.2, for the alleged
offences punishable under the provisions of the POCSO Act and
consequently, the proceeding pending before the learned Special
Judge (POCSO), Shillong, East Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya,
being Special (POCSO) Case No.17 of 2023.
4. Quashing is sought on the premise that the parties i.e.,
the petitioner No.1 and petitioner No.2, are staying together as
husband and wife and from the said relationship have a child
aged three years.
5. Today, learned counsel for the petitioner has tendered a
marriage certificate of the petitioners. The said marriage
certificate is taken on record. From the said marriage certificate,
it appears that the petitioners solemnized their marriage on 4th
July, 2026.
Page 2 of 12
2026:MLHC:682
6. Since, the petitioner No.2 was a minor aged 17 years at
the relevant time, the respondent No.2 lodged an FIR as against
the petitioner No.1 with the Rynjah Police Station. On the last
date, notice was issued to the respondent No.2 (mother of the
petitioner No.2-original complainant).
7. Both, the petitioners were also directed to appear before
the Secretary, High Court Legal Service Committee so as to
enable the Secretary to submit her report whether the consent
given by the petitioner No.2 was an informed consent; and
whether the petitioner No.2 had received any benefits under any
of the Schemes of the State or Central government for herself or
her child etc. Pursuant thereto, the Secretary, High Court Legal
Service Committee has tendered her report in a sealed envelope.
The envelope was opened and the report dated 24th June, 2026
is perused. From a perusal of the report, it appears that at the
relevant time, the petitioner No.1 was about 20 years of age and
petitioner No.2, 17 years. Today, petitioner No.1 is aged 24 years
and petitioner No.2, 20 years. From the said report, it appears
that the petitioners are living together with their daughter aged
three years, in the respondent No.2’s house, at Nongmensong,
Page 3 of 12
2026:MLHC:682
East Khasi Hills, Shillong. It appears that the petitioner No.2 has
completed Class-X and is working in a cloth shop and is earning
about ₹10,000 per month. It appears that the petitioner No.2 has
passed Class-XII and has no income of her own. It further
appears from the report that the household expenditure is taken
care of by the parents of the petitioner No.2 and petitioner No.1
also contributes towards the same and also takes care of the
personal expenditure of the petitioner No.2 and their child. It
further appears from the report that the petitioners have got
formally married as per their customs, in the presence of both
sides of the families as well as the members of the Dorbar
Shnong.
8. From the report it appears that the petitioner No.2 is
happily living with the petitioner No.1 and have got married. It
further appears that the petitioners had got formally married in
the Church on 4th July, 2026 and a certificate to that effect is
tendered by the learned counsel for the petitioners today.
9. From the report, it also appears that neither the petitioner
No.2 nor her child have received any benefits from either the
Page 4 of 12
2026:MLHC:682
State or Central government. The petitioner No.2 has no
objection to the case being quashed qua the petitioner No.1.
Respondent No.2 is present in person. When questioned she
reiterates that she too has no objection if the case is closed,
since the petitioner are married and are living happily. Learned
counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 has tendered a photo
copy of the Epic Card duly attested by her, the same is taken on
record.
10. This Court in Shri Shalenbor Wahlang v. State of
Meghalaya & anr passed in Crl.Petn.No.92 of 2023 dated 12th
March, 2026 has in paragraphs 31, 33, 34 and 35 observed as
under:
“31. The ground realities in the State of Meghalaya cannot
be ignored and lost sight of. It shows high incidents of
adolescent consensual relationships culminating in
elopement and early marriage or living together, as
husband and wife, which is recognised by the society.
Infact, cases of adolescent relationships where the parties
i.e., the victim and the boy have got married or are living
together as husband and wife and have a child from the
said relationship are far too many, resulting in parties
filing petitions under Section 528 BNSS (earlier, Section
482 Cr.P.C.) seeking quashing of the proceeding by
consent of the parties.
32. …..
Page 5 of 12
2026:MLHC:682
33. What also cannot be lost sight of is, that in Meghalaya,
matrilineal system is a rare, ancient societal structure
among the Khasi, Garo and Jaintia tribes, where lineage
and inheritance pass through the mother. Children take
their mother’s surname, the youngest daughter inherits the
property (is the custodian of ancestral property) and the
husband often moves into the wife’s house. The system is
believed to have originated from an agrarian society and the
need to protect the family structure, ensuring women’s
economic security, social stability and the preservation of
tribal identity. Infact, in the Khasi community, women have
more independence than women in many patriarchal
communities, including the freedom to select their
partners, remarry without shame and take an active role in
public places like market place and businesses. It is in this
background that this Court would have to consider a case
seeking quashing of a POCSO case by consent, keeping in
mind all factors, including the girl’s (victim’s) and her
child’s social security, by ensuring that she and the child
get the benefit of the government schemes, including under
the POCSO Act.
34. Thus, from the aforesaid discussion, quashing of a
POCSO case under Section 528 BNSS by consent, is
permissible even if it is a special statute and there is no
specific exclusion of any present law/custom. However, the
said discretion has to be used with due care and caution
and circumspection in exceptional cases, to do justice. As
noted earlier, there cannot be any straitjacket formula as to
in which cases the said discretion can or cannot be
exercised, inasmuch as, that would depend on the facts
and circumstances of each case i.e., the age of the parties
coming before the court; whether the consent given by the
victim is an informed consent and not under coercion of the
family members or the boy; that the victim and the accused
are married and have a child or are living together as
husband and wife, as per the customs in the State of
Meghalaya, etc. Where parties are living together as
husband and wife or are married, a police report, or a
Page 6 of 12
2026:MLHC:682report from any authority, be called for, verifying the said
claim. Also, while considering whether the consent of the
victim is an ‘informed consent’, it is necessary that the
victim places her affidavit on record giving her ‘No
Objection’ to the quashing of the case. That, before such an
affidavit is accepted, in order to ensure that the consent is
an informed consent, the victim may be sent before the
Secretary, MLSA or Secretary, DLSA to ascertain whether
the consent is an informed consent, by giving her time to
ponder over the same; and a report be called for, before
such quashing petition is considered. While quashing the
case, the Government schemes that may be available to a
victim in a POCSO Act and the child born from the said
relationship also be given due weightage as suggested and
directed by the Apex Court in the case of Re: Right to
Privacy of Adolescents (supra).
35. No doubt, we are conscious of the fact that a case
under POCSO Act, is not a case against an individual, but
is an offence against the society as a whole, however, the
administration or enforcement of the law cannot be
divorced from lived realities. Rendering justice demands not
only that the law be applied with precision, but also that it
be tempered with fairness, compassion and empathy when
the situation/facts of a case, warrant it. Thus, it is
necessary to maintain a fine balance between the
competing interests of justice, deterrence and
rehabilitation. Where the victim and the boy are married or
are living together as husband and wife (and recognised),
and have a child/children, sending the boy to jail would not
serve the cause of justice, rather it would cause great
injustice to the victim and the child born from the said
consensual relationship, as ultimately, the aim of the law is
to do justice. Thus, in cases where the court comes to the
conclusion, that the consent given by the victim is a
genuine and informed consent and that it would be greater
injustice to send the boy to jail, instead of letting the
parties live together as one family, the Court may consider
quashing the case, pending trial, keeping in mind what is
stated aforesaid. We may note, considering the large
Page 7 of 12
2026:MLHC:682number of POCSO cases, in particular Romeo – Juliet cases,
it is the responsibility of the State Government to create
awareness amongst the people, including the children
about the provisions of the POCSO Act, its punishment,
etc., not only in the cities but also in the interior and
remote places, including schools, colleges, etc.”
11. As noted above, the parties i.e., the petitioners are living
together as husband and wife and have a child aged three years
from the said relationship. In the interregnum, during the
pendency of the aforesaid petition, the petitioners got formally
married, in addition to the customary marriage performed by
them. It appears from the papers that the relationship was
consensual and was a romantic relationship. The respondent
No.2 has also given her consent to the quashing of the
FIR/proceeding, since her daughter i.e., petitioner No.2 is
happily residing with the petitioner No.1. The report of the
Secretary, High Court Legal Service Committee also shows that
the petitioners are living happily together and that both the
petitioner No.2 and the respondent No.2 have no objection to the
quashing of the FIR/proceeding.
12. The learned prosecutor has also tendered a report of WPSI
S. Singh, the Investigating Officer. The said report is also taken
Page 8 of 12
2026:MLHC:682
on record. From the said report, it appears that the police have
verified the position as disclosed in the petition and have found
that the petitioners are living together as husband and wife
under the same roof with their daughter aged three years, since
2025.
13. Considering the aforesaid, no purpose would be served in
continuing the proceeding qua the petitioner No.1. Accordingly,
the petition is allowed and the FIR registered with the Rynjah
Police Station, East Khasi Hills District, being PS Case No.19
(02) 2023, dated 17th February, 2023 and consequently, the
proceeding pending before the learned Special Judge (POCSO),
Shillong, East Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya, being Special
(POCSO) Case No.17 of 2023, are hereby quashed and set aside.
14. Needless to state, that the DCPO, East Khasi Hills District,
Shillong and the Secretary, DSLA, East Khasi Hills District,
Shillong, to take steps and verify whether the petitioner No.2 has
received any benefit under any of the Central or State
government Schemes, for herself and her child. The Schemes are
as under;
Page 9 of 12
2026:MLHC:682
(i) Scheme for Care and Support to Victims of under
Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act (exclusively for POSCO
victims) [Nirbhaya Fund];
(ii) Mission Vatsalya Scheme (Child Protection Services);
(iii) Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao (BBBP) Scheme;
(iv) Meghalaya Victim Compensation Scheme, 2022;
(v) Meghalaya Health Insurance Scheme;
(vi) Ayushman Bharat-PM-JAY (free health);
(vii) Mission 1000 Days-Meghalaya;
(viii) Rashtriya Bal Swasthya Karyakram (RBSK);
(ix) Chief Minister’s Safe Motherhood Scheme or CM-SMS;
(x) Special Training Programme for age-appropriate
admission of Out of School Children (OoSC) and Back to
School Campaign;
(xi) Samagra Siksha (Back to School);
(xii) NALSA (Child-Friendly Legal Services for Children)
Scheme 2024;
(xiii) NALSA (Legal Services to Persons with Mental Illness
and Persons with intellectual Disabilities) Scheme, 2024;
(xiv) Mission Shakti-Women’s Safety, Support and
Empowerment; and
(xv) Insurance or any other scheme.”
15. The DCPO, East Khasi Hills District, Shillong as well as
the Secretary, DSLA, East Khasi Hills District, Shillong, to assist
the petitioner No.2 in getting all such benefits, as may be
applicable to her and her child.
Page 10 of 12
2026:MLHC:682
16. Needless to state, that if any amount is disbursed under
the Meghalaya Victim Compensation Scheme, the same to be
kept in a fixed deposit, till the survivor attains the age of 25
years. The survivor will be entitled to quarterly interest on the
said amount and would be free to decide what she wants to do
with the said amount, once she attains the age of 25 years.
17. The Registry to forthwith forward a copy of this order
to the Member Secretary, Meghalaya State Legal Services
Authority, Shillong and Commissioner and Secretary, Social
Welfare Department, Shillong as well as to the DCPO, East
Khasi Hills District, Shillong and the Secretary, DSLA, East
Khasi Hills District, Shillong, to enable them to take steps
and comply with the same.
18. The petition is allowed and Rule is made absolute on the
aforesaid terms.
19. Petition is accordingly disposed of.
20. Stand over to 7th September, 2026 for recording
compliance of the directions given.
Page 11 of 12
2026:MLHC:682
21. All parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order.
(Revati Mohite Dere)
Chief Justice
Meghalaya
06.07.2026
“Lam DR-PS”
Page 12 of 12
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
LAMPHRANG KHARCHANDY
Date: 2026.07.08 20:19:11 IST
