Shillong, April 19: The Meghalaya High Court has quashed two POCSO FIRs within a week on grounds that the couples were now living together and had children.
Both judgments were handed down by Chief Justice Revati Mohe Dere.
The huge number of such so-called Romeo and Juliet cases in the state has resulted in the judiciary taking a nuanced view of certain cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
In such cases, the perpetrator, invariably a man, is an adult and the female a minor. Although there is no exclusion under the POCSO Act, the High Court has previously, in the Shalenbor Wahlang vs State of Meghalaya case, ruled that Meghalaya’s unique matrilineal system means that women have more agency in choosing their mates and in marriage/remarriage.
However, the court also made it clear that such discretion has to be used with “due care and caution and circumspection in exceptional cases” and to do justice.
In the first of the two most recent cases, the female had entered into a romantic relationship with the accused in 2021 and became pregnant. When the man suggested an abortion, she refused and filed an FIR. However, they since reconciled, she gave birth to a boy (now 2 years old) and the couple are living together.
The POCSO case was pending before the special POCSO court when the petition to quash it was brought before the High Court by the accused.
The other POCSO case came about from an FIR registered with Mawshynrut Police Station for alleged offences under Section 5 (aggravated penetrative sexual assault). The case was being heard by the Special Judge (POCSO) of West Khasi Hills. Here, both the accused and victim filed a joint petition to quash the case. The man was 26 years old and the girl 16 at the time the FIR was filed. They now have two children and are living together.
In both cases, the families consented to the relationship. In the Mawlai case the couple had subsequently married in church, while in the Mawshynrut case the couple intend on being wed formally.
The cases were only quashed after the High Court received a satisfactory report from the High Court Legal Services Committee on whether the consent by the females to quash the case was “informed”. The employment status of both men was also recorded in the judgement.
In the Shalenbor Wahlang case, the High Court had noted that “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.”
POCSO cases where the couple – now living as husband and wife – seek quashing are “far too many”, it added.
In the present cases, the court also ruled that, even though it had stopped the proceedings against the two accused, the women should still receive benefits under applicable schemes, such as the Meghalaya Victim Compensation Scheme and scheme for care and support of POCSO victims.
