Shillong: The Meghalaya High Court has quashed an FIR, chargesheet and pending Special POCSO case against a man, who has lived since 2017 as husband and wife with the survivor and their child, after finding her consent to be informed.
Applying its own judgment in Shalenbor Wahlang v. State of Meghalaya (10.04.2026), Chief Justice Revati Mohite Dere also directed the authorities to extend a range of State and Central welfare benefits to the survivor and her daughter within eight weeks.
The petition, Crl. Petn. No. 126/2026, was filed through the High Court Legal Services Committee and sought quashing of Sadar P.S. Case No. 274(11) of 2017, the chargesheet and Special (POCSO) Case No. 16 of 2025 pending before the Special Judge (POCSO), East Khasi Hills, Shillong. At the time of the offence, the petitioner was 18 years old and the survivor was 17 years, 11 months and 27 days, that is, three days short of majority. The two have since lived together as husband and wife, and have a child now about eight years old.
Before deciding, the Court did not rely on the parties’ word. It directed the survivor and her mother, the complainant, to appear before the Secretary of the High Court Legal Services Committee to report on whether their consent was informed and whether the survivor and her child had received any government benefit, and it called for a report from the police on the truth of the petition’s contents. The police report, confirmed the petition’s contents.
The Secretary’s sealed report, dated 02.09.2026, recorded that the survivor was in love with the petitioner and had a physical relationship of her own free will. She became pregnant in 2017 and gave birth to a son in December 2017, who died within a month, and later had a daughter. The petitioner was taking care of them. The survivor, who works as a cleaner earning about Rs. 10,000 a month, has received no benefit under any State or Central scheme and had no objection to quashing. Her mother also said the petitioner was taking good care of her daughter and she did not wish to proceed.
The Court relied on its decision in Shalenbor Wahlang, which it extracted at length. That judgment noted high incidence in Meghalaya of adolescent consensual relationships ending in elopement, early marriage or living together, and referred to the matrilineal structure of the Khasi, Garo and Jaintia communities, in which lineage and inheritance pass through the mother and women enjoy freedom to choose partners. In that setting, it held, quashing of a POCSO case by consent under Section 528 BNSS is permissible even though POCSO is a special statute, but the discretion must be used “with due care and caution and circumspection in exceptional cases.”
The factors listed there include the age of the parties, whether the survivor’s consent is informed and not under coercion from family or the boy, and whether the parties are married or living together as husband and wife and have a child. Cohabitation should be verified by a police or authority report, and informed consent tested through the survivor’s no-objection affidavit and a report from the Legal Services Authority. Government schemes available to the survivor and the child must be given due weightage, as the Supreme Court suggested in Re: Right to Privacy of Adolescents.
The Bench reiterated its earlier balancing of interests:
“A case under POCSO Act, is not a case against an individual, but is an offence against the society as a whole, however, the administration or enforcement of the law cannot be divorced from lived realities… Where the victim and the boy are married or are living together as husband and wife (and recognised), and have a child/children, sending the boy to jail would not serve the cause of justice.”
Taking into account the Secretary’s report, the police report confirming the cohabitation since 2017 with a daughter aged seven to eight, and the no objection of the survivor and her mother, the Court found no impediment and quashed the FIR, chargesheet and proceedings, making the rule absolute.
The Court directed that the survivor and her daughter be extended all applicable benefits, listing fifteen heads including the Nirbhaya Fund scheme for care and support of POCSO victims, Mission Vatsalya, Beti Bachao Beti Padhao, the Meghalaya Victim Compensation Scheme, 2022, and Ayushman Bharat PM-JAY.
It also directed the District Child Protection Officer and the Secretary, DLSA, East Khasi Hills, to ensure the benefits within eight weeks, appoint a support person to help the survivor, and file a compliance report.
The matter is listed on 11.11.2026 for recording compliance, and the order is to be sent to the Meghalaya State Legal Services Authority and the Social Welfare Department.
Appearances:
For the Petitioner: Mr. S. Deb, LAC.
For the Respondents: Mr. A.S. Dey, GA.
Case Title: SS vs. State of Meghalaya & Ors., Crl. Petn. No. 126/2026, 2026:MLHC:1044
