Rajasthan HC rejects Bail to REET Paper Leak Accused Ram Kripal Meena
Allahabad HC Reserves Verdict on Muslim Parties' Plea Against Varanasi Court Order
Jharkhand HC Announces 55 Assistant Positions in Ranchi; Online Applications Now Open!
Sister-in-Law's Frequent Visits Insufficient to Establish Residence in DV Case : Bombay HC
P&H HC Grants Interim Bail to Eight-Month Pregnant Woman Accused in Murder Case, Citing Health Risks to Mother and Unborn Child
Kerala HC Denies 'Non-Creamy Layer' Certification Plea, Citing Ineligibility Based on Hereditary Occupation Criteria
ED Shifts Sameer Wankhede's Money Laundering Case to Delhi, Informs Bombay HC
J& H HC Emphasizes Due Process, Slams Overuse of Preventive Detention under PSA
Madras High Court Quashes FIR Against Journalist Abhijit Majumder Over Periyar Remarks
Calcutta HC Takes Suo Motu Action on Alleged Sexual Assault and Land Transfer in Sandeshkhali
POCSO FIR quashing: SC issues notice on Joint petition of accused and prosecutrix

POCSO FIR quashing: SC issues notice on Joint petition of accused and prosecutrix

The bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Aravind Kumar issued notice on a joint petition filed by the husband and wife for quashing of the FIR lodged by the family members of the wife.

The bench issued notice on the statement made by Senior Advocate Kaustav Paul that both of them commenced before the girl was 18 years if age but later the same relationship has been fructified into marriage and their five-month child is now being reared by the couple. 

Earlier the Meghalaya High Court dismissed the quashing petition filed under section 482 CRPC.

The petition says that both the petitioners were neighbours and they were in a relationship since March, 2017 (i.e. just before she became major). Out of the relationship a child was born in November, 2022. Unfortunately during the delivery of the child, the Petitioner could not be present and take Petitioner No. 2 for delivery etc and an FIR was lodged by Petitioner No. 2, that she had been raped by the Petitioner No.1 on 28.02.2022 as a result of which she had conceived.

They had relied upon the judgment of  K DHANDAPANI VERSUS THE STATE BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE in CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.796 OF 2022 of the Supreme Court.

Case Details:-

SLP (Crl) No. 3364/2023

Bhalland Shylla & Anr.

Versus

The State of Meghalaya

Click here to read/download the order

Appearances of the Advocates:-

 Mr. Kaustav Paul, Sr. Adv.
 Ms. Babita Sharma Goyal, Adv.
 Mr. Rishi Matoliya, AOR
 Mr. Nikhil Kumar Singh, Adv.
 Mr. Kshitij Bikramia, Adv.
 Mr. Pavan Sharma, Adv.
 Mr. Raghuveer Pujari, Adv.
 Ms. Sumati Sharma, Adv.

Share this News

Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy