ADVERTISEMENT
Patna High Court
Lal Bahadur Yadav vs The State Of Bihar on 14 July, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19400 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-367 Year-2020 Thana- TRIVENIGANJ District- Supaul
======================================================
1. Lal Bahadur Yadav Son Of Late Khusilal Yadav Resident Of Village -
Narha, Ward No.14, P.S.- Treveiganj, Distt.- Supaul.
2. Kanchan Devi W/O Sir Lal Bahadur Yadav Resident Of Village - Narha,
Ward No.14, P.S.- Treveiganj, Distt.- Supaul.
3. Milan Kumari D/O Sri Lal Bahadru Yadav Resident Of Village - Narha,
Ward No.14, P.S.- Treveiganj, Distt.- Supaul.
4. Prabhas Kumar Son Of Late Bahadur Yadav Resident Of Village - Narha,
Ward No.14, P.S.- Treveiganj, Distt.- Supaul.
5. Mithlesh Kumar Son Of Sri Lal Bahadur Yadav Resident Of Village - Narha,
Ward No.14, P.S.- Treveiganj, Distt.- Supaul.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. 'X'
Puja Kumari D/o Sir Bijendra Yadav Resident of Village - Ganeshur
Malhanama, Ward no.1, P.S.- Malhanama, P.S.- Trivenganj, Distt.- Supaul.
3. Bijendra Yadav Son of Sri Sukhdeo Yadav Resident of Village - Ganeshur
Malhanama, Ward no.1, P.S.- Malhanama, P.S.- Trivenganj, Distt.- Supaul.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amrit Abhijat, Advocate
: Mr. Manoj Kumar Gupta, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, A.P.P.
For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Sanjay Singh, Advocate
: Ms. Shubhra, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 14-07-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.P.P.
for the State and learned counsel for opposite party no.2, who is
the victim of the present case as also the daughter of the O.P. No.3.
However, so far as opposite party no.3 i.e. the informant is
concerned, he has chosen not to appear in the present proceedings,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19400 of 2022 dt.14-07-2026
2/10
although the office notes indicate that he had received the notices
personally.
2. The present application has been filed for quashing
the order dated 01.07.2021 passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Sessions Judge, POCSO, Supaul,
whereby and whereunder cognizance was taken for the offences
under Section 363, 366(A), 376/34 of the I.P.C. and Section 8/17
of Protection of Children from Sexual Offence (POCSO) Act and
summons were issued to them.
3. The case of the prosecution is based upon the First
Information Report, bearing Triveniganj P.S. Case No. 367 of
2020, dated 10.12.2020, wherein an allegation was made by the
opposite party no.2 (father of victim), that his minor daughter aged
about 16 years was forcibly taken away by the accused persons on
the point of pistol and he was also threatened.
4. It is clarified that although the victim has now
attained majority, her name has been masked and stated as 'X'
since the case at hand is one under the POCSO Act.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners were falsely implicated by way of the said First
Information Report and, as a matter of fact, the daughter of the
informant (O.P. No. 2), who has since attained majority, was in a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19400 of 2022 dt.14-07-2026
3/10
love relationship with the petitioner no.5 (Mithlesh Kumar) and on
account of the same, had gone along with him willfully without
any force or coercion. It has further been submitted that petitioner
no.5 and the victim also solemnized marriage after their eloping
and the same was executed before the Notary, Lakhisarai
(Annexure-3 Series). The victim even filed an application before
the POCSO Court, Supaul along with marriage certificate and
affidavit to state that she was married with petitioner no.5 and had
gone voluntarily without any coercion whatsoever. Her statement
under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S. was also recorded and on being
asked by the learned Court in seisin she stated that she wanted to
go to the house of her husband.
6. It has further been contended that although, according
to her educational certificate, she was trying to be shown as a
minor but the said certificates were not the original copies,
whereas in her medical report the doctor has assessed her age to be
between 18 to 19 years and the learned Magistrate even at the time
of recording the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has assessed
her age to be 17 years.
7. Learned counsel, after making such submissions, has
relied upon the settlement that has been entered into between the
parties at the level of panchayat, which was filed before the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19400 of 2022 dt.14-07-2026
4/10
learned POCSO Court on 02.04.2025 and the same has been
brought on record by way of supplementary affidavit to the present
application. The alleged documents clearly indicate that the victim
is now married to one Mukesh Kumar, son of Jay Nand Yadav and
is residing along with her husband in Village-Lavdih, Ward No.6,
P.S.- Triveniganj, District- Supaul and she has prayed that her case
be closed as she does not want to pursue the same any further. This
document bears the signature of both the victim girl as also
petitioner no.5 (Mithilesh Kumar) along with the signatures of
other witnesses who are the Up-Mukhiya and members of the
Ward.
8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite
party no.2 does not refute the factum of settlement arrived at
between the parties and also does not doubt the genuineness of the
documents that have been brought on record. He also does not
opposes the present application on account of the fact that the
victim does not want to pursue the case any further.
9. In the wake of such settlement between the parties
and also considering the wilful and consensual relationship
between the victim (O.P. No.2) and petitioner no.5, it can be safely
concluded that what was a consensual relationship between the
parties at initial stages, cannot be given a colour of criminality
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19400 of 2022 dt.14-07-2026
5/10
when the said relationship does not fructify into a marital
relationship, as has been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the
case of Prashant vs. State of NCT Delhi, reported in (2025) 5
SCC 764. In such cases, the Courts have been conscious of the
worrying trend where, consensual relationships turning bitter, are
being sought to be criminalised, by invoking criminal
jurisprudence and Courts are hence taking steps towards quashing
of such unwarranted criminal prosecution.
10. The issue at hand has been minutely observed by
Delhi High Court in CRL. M.C. 4168/2022 titled as Sonu @ Sunil
vs State of NCT Delhi & Ors. wherein it was noted as under -
"26. Of late, however, the Courts are
faced with petitions where children, who are about to
attain the age of majority, in ignorance of the
statutory prohibitions and restrictions and
consequences, in the name of love, commit acts
which would otherwise amount to offence under the
provisions of the Child Marriage Act, POCSO Act,
and the IPC. Though, being minor, their consent is
immaterial, however, factually it is there. This
situation makes the Courts face with two
consequences, either to go strictly by the mandate of
the statute and convict the boy and impose
punishment on him, which is rather severe in these
statutes, or to exercise its power under Section 482
of the Cr.P.C. to protect the otherwise innocent
children/adult by quashing the criminal proceedings.
The Courts when faced with such a dilemma, has
been adopting the route of exercising its power under
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19400 of 2022 dt.14-07-2026
6/10
Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., to quash such criminal
proceedings where it finds that the girl was nearing
the age of majority; had gone with the boy of her
own free will (though it may be immaterial in law); is
happily living with the boy, either in matrimony or
otherwise, after attaining the age of majority; and in
some circumstances where such relationship has also
resulted in children being born. The Court, in such
circumstances, is persuaded to save the lives of such
an accused, rather than to make him undergo trial
and eventual punishment, which would not only ruin
innocent lives of the parties to such a relationship,
but may be, also of the children that are born
therefrom. In this regard, apart from the judgments
that have been cited by the learned Amicus, I may
also refer to the judgment of the Supreme Court in
Kapil Gupta v. State of NCT of Delhi and Another,
2022 SCC OnLine SC 1030, wherein the Supreme
Court, while quashing an FIR and consequential
proceedings where the accused had been charged
with offence under Section 376 of the IPC, observed
as under:-
13. It can thus be seen that this
Court has clearly held that though the Court
should be slow in quashing the proceedings
wherein heinous and serious offences are
involved, the High Court is not foreclosed
from examining as to whether there exists
material for incorporation of such an offence
or as to whether there is sufficient evidence
which if proved would lead to proving the
charge for the offence charged with. The
Court has also to take into consideration as
to whether the settlement between the parties
is going to result into harmony between them
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19400 of 2022 dt.14-07-2026
7/10
which may improve their mutual
relationship."
11. So far as offences under Section 376 IPC or the
POCSO Act are concerned, the Courts no doubt need to act with
adequate prudence while quashing criminal proceedings even
when a compromise has been reached, but at the same time it is
also important that the Courts should not overlook or brush aside
subsequent developments, including the factum of marriage
between the parties or any subsequent settlement arrived at, giving
a peaceful quietus to the litigation, especially when victim herself
takes initiative and makes affidavits before Court expressing her
desire to bring criminal prosecution to a close.
12. In such circumstances, it will only be expedient in
the interest of justice to quash the proceedings to bring peace and
secure the ends of justice. It has to be kept in mind that laws like
POCSO Act are welfare legislations in order to protect children
from sexual exploitation and the object is not to criminalize
relationships. Very recently the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Anurudh & Anr. reported in 2026 (2)
PLJR 161 (SC): 2026 SCC OnLine SC 40 has highlighted the
misuse of POCSO provisions by families to settle personal scores
and suggested the Union Government to consider introducing a
"Romeo-Juliet" clause into the law aimed at exempting
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19400 of 2022 dt.14-07-2026
8/10
consensual adolescent relationships, where the partners are close
in age, from the stringent, non-bailable and mandatory reporting
provisions of the POCSO Act, 2012.
13. Having heard the contentions of the parties and also
having gone through the documents on record including the
supplementary affidavit indicating an amicable settlement between
the parties, this Court is of the view that right from the inception it
was a case of an adolescent love between the victim and petitioner
no.5 and no offences of either kidnapping or under provisions of
the POCSO Act appeared to be made out. This Court has
considered the application filed by the victim herself before the
concerned Court stating that she had voluntarily left with the
petitioner no.5 and also that medically, she was found to be an
adult. Even if her age is assumed to be 17 years, as stated in the
statement recorded under section 164 of the Cr.P.C., she was on
the verge of attaining majority and thus had the requisite decision
making power, sufficient maturity and intellectual capacity to have
an assessment of her indulgence in any act being right or wrong.
14. At this juncture, this Court would gainfully refer to
the case of Samadhan S/o Sitaram Manmothe vs. The State Of
Maharashtra & Another [2025 INSC 1351] wherein the Hon'ble
Supreme Court, in paragraph 40, held that the High Courts ought
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19400 of 2022 dt.14-07-2026
9/10
to exercise their power under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. in cases of
consensual relationship, where such consent is deviod of any
coercion fraud or misrepresentation. Paragraph-40 is being
reproduced as under:
"40. In view of the foregoing analysis,
we are unable to concur with the findings recorded
by the High Court, inasmuch as the present case
pertains to a consensual relationship, and the acts
of respondent No.2 clearly manifest consent to such
a relationship devoid of any coercion, fraud, or
misrepresentation as Page 23 of 24 contemplated in
Section 19 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. In our
opinion, the High Court's refusal to exercise its
jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS is
unsustainable. The acts complained of in the
present case occurred within the contours of a
relationship that was, at the time, voluntary and
willing. The continuation of the prosecution in such
facts would be nothing short of an abuse of the
court machinery."
15. Thus, taking a progressive vision, as guided by the
Hon'ble Apex Court and in wake of settlement having been
reached between the parties, this Court is of the considered view
that it would be against the interest of justice if the present
prosecution is allowed to continue as the purpose and objective of
the POCSO Act has to be understood in its correct perspective and
not misconstrued for criminalising relationships. The continuance
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19400 of 2022 dt.14-07-2026
10/10
of such prosecution would only entail undue harassment to both
the parties and would amount to abuse of the process of the Court.
16. In such view of the matter, the order dated
01.07.2021
passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI-
cum Special Judge, POCSO, Supaul is hereby quashed.
SPONSORED
Accordingly, the present application stands allowed.
17. Interlocutory Application, if any, shall also stand
disposed of accordingly.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
ayush/-
AFR/NAFR AFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 15.07.2026 Transmission Date 15.07.2026
