Click the Play button to listen to article

The Sikkim High Court has held that criminal proceedings under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) cannot be quashed merely on the basis of a settlement between the accused and the survivor, even if the survivor has subsequently attained majority.

Justice Bhaskar Raj Pradhan remarked that: “even if the accused and the survivor who has now attained majority were to come out with a settlement, the High Court could not have quashed the prosecution under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. or under Article 226 of the Constitution”.

Background:

The case arose from an FIR registered at Sadar Police Station, Gangtok, concerning an alleged sexual offence committed on November 26, 2022, when the survivor was 17 years old.

The accused, who was around 19 years old at the time, was charged under the POCSO Act and Section 376 IPC. During the pendency of the trial, the families entered into a compromise, and by then the survivor had attained majority.

The accused and survivor, along with their respective parents, subsequently approached the High Court seeking quashing of the FIR and criminal proceedings under Section 528 BNSS. 

The Court noted that the survivor was below 18 years at the time of the incident. Under the POCSO framework, a child is a person below 18 years and the consent of a child does not have legal validity. 

The Court observed that the deed was formally executed between the parents of the survivor and the accused and therefore could not strictly be described as a compromise between the survivor and accused. Nevertheless, the affidavits filed by all the petitioners, including the survivor and accused, demonstrated their intention to settle the matter.

Although the Court acknowledged that the accused, who was around 19 years old at the time of the incident, could face a severe sentence and potentially spend a substantial part of his life in prison, it held that this consideration could not override the binding Supreme Court precedent. 

Accordingly, the Court rejected the Section 528 BNSS petition and directed that a copy of the order be sent to the Special POCSO Court at Gangtok. It observed that if the parties desired, they could approach the Supreme Court for relief.

Case Name: xxxxxx v/s State of Sikkim

Case No.: CRL. M.C. No.2 of 2026

Date of Decision: 02.09.2026

Click Here To Read/Download Order



Tags: