Court Considers Societal Realities, Informed Consent, and Benefits for Victim in Landmark Judgment
In a landmark judgment, the Meghalaya High Court has quashed an FIR registered under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, against Shri. Vicky Kharsati following a consensual relationship culminating in marriage, thereby setting a precedent for balancing societal norms with legal mandates. The case, identified as Crl.Petn.No.17 of 2026, was presided over by Chief Justice Mrs. Revati Mohite Dere, who emphasized the importance of informed consent and societal realities in such cases.
The petitioners, Vicky Kharsati and his partner, who were originally embroiled in legal proceedings under Sections 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012, sought relief from the court to quash the FIR. The couple, who had married according to local customs and were living together with their two young children, argued that their relationship was consensual and supported by their families.
The FIR was initially lodged by a medical officer when Kharsati's partner, then a minor, visited the hospital during her pregnancy. The court, considering the matrilineal customs of Meghalaya, which allow for early marriage and consensual relationships, acknowledged the lived realities of the community.
The judgment highlighted the necessity of ensuring informed consent, as well as the importance of extending government benefits to the victim and her children. The court directed the Secretary of the High Court Legal Services Committee to ascertain the voluntariness of the victim's consent and her access to governmental aid. The subsequent report confirmed that the victim was living voluntarily and had expressed interest in pursuing vocational training in baking.
The court’s decision was grounded in the recognition of Meghalaya's unique social structure, where women hold significant autonomy and economic security. The judgment stressed the need for legal systems to adapt to societal customs, especially in cases involving consensual adolescent relationships.
In her judgment, Justice Dere reflected on the balance between justice, deterrence, and rehabilitation, noting that enforcing the law without regard to societal context could lead to greater injustices. The court directed that all applicable government schemes, such as the Nirbhaya Fund and Mission Vatsalya, be made accessible to the victim and her children, and mandated compliance within eight weeks.
This ruling marks a significant step in addressing the complexities of POCSO cases in regions with distinct cultural practices, advocating for a compassionate approach that reconciles legal obligations with societal realities.
Bottom line:-
The FIR under Sections 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 can be quashed by consent in exceptional cases where the parties are married or living as husband and wife, considering societal realities, informed consent of the victim, and ensuring social and economic security of the victim and their children.
Statutory provision(s): Sections 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012; Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) (formerly Section 482 Cr.P.C.); Nirbhaya Fund; Mission Vatsalya Scheme; Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao Scheme; Meghalaya Victim Compensation Scheme, 2022; Meghalaya Health Insurance Scheme; Ayushman Bharat-PM-JAY; Mission 1000 Days-Meghalaya; Rashtriya Bal Swasthya Karyakram (RBSK); Chief Minister's Safe Motherhood Scheme; Special Training Programme for Out of School Children; Samagra Siksha; NALSA Schemes; Mission Shakti.
Shri. Vicky Kharsati v. State of Meghalaya, (Meghalaya) : Law Finder Doc id # 2888057
