In a significant ruling on consent and age verification, the Allahabad High Court quashed an FIR registered under Section 137(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) after finding that the victim was above 18 years of age and had consented to the alleged act. The Court held that continuation of proceedings in such circumstances would amount to an abuse of process, reinforcing the principle that criminal law cannot be weaponized where no offence is made out.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
The petitioners, Jaykaran @ Jai Karan and others, approached the Allahabad High Court seeking quashing of FIR No. 0337 of 2026, dated 26.04.2026, registered under Section 137(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) at Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Gonda. The FIR alleged that the daughter of respondent no. 5, aged about 17 years, was enticed by Ram Sagar (son and brother of the petitioners) and two unknown persons.
Key Facts
- FIR Registration: The FIR was lodged on 26.04.2026 under Section 137(2) BNS, alleging enticement of a minor girl
- Victim’s Age: The FIR claimed the victim was about 17 years old, but the petitioners contended that she was above 18 years as per her birth certificate
- Matrimonial Alliance: The parties later agreed to a matrimonial alliance between the son of the petitioners and the daughter of respondent no. 5
- Victim’s Statement: The victim’s statement under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) confirmed her consent to the relationship
Procedural History
- 26.04.2026: FIR No. 0337 of 2026 registered under Section 137(2) BNS
- Subsequent Date: Petitioners filed Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 5911 of 2026 seeking quashing of the FIR
- Hearing: The matter was heard by a Division Bench comprising Hon’ble Pankaj Bhatia, J. and Hon’ble Amitabh Kumar Rai, J.
- Compromise: During the proceedings, the parties informed the Court of their settlement and the proposed matrimonial alliance
Relief Sought
The petitioners sought quashing of FIR No. 0337 of 2026 on the grounds that:
- The victim was above 18 years of age as per her birth certificate
- The victim had consented to the relationship
- Continuation of proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law
The Legal Issue
The primary legal question before the Court was whether an FIR under Section 137(2) of the BNS could be sustained where:
- The victim was above 18 years of age, negating the offence of enticement of a minor
- The victim had explicitly consented to the alleged act
- The parties had amicably settled the matter through a matrimonial alliance
Arguments Presented
For the Petitioners
- Contended that the FIR was lodged on a mistaken premise regarding the victim’s age
- Argued that the victim’s consent, as evidenced by her statement under Section 183 BNSS, negated any offence under Section 137(2) BNS
- Submitted that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law, especially in light of the settlement between the parties
For the Respondent (Victim’s Father)
- Initially opposed the quashing but later stated that he did not wish to pursue the matter
- Accepted the matrimonial alliance proposed between his daughter and the son of the petitioners
The Court's Analysis
The Court examined the factual matrix and legal provisions to determine whether the FIR could be sustained. Key observations included:
-
Age Verification: The Court noted that the FIR alleged the victim was 17 years old, but the petitioners produced a birth certificate indicating she was above 18 years. This discrepancy was critical, as Section 137(2) BNS criminalizes the enticement of a minor, and the victim’s age was a determining factor.
-
Consent of the Victim: The Court relied on the victim’s statement under Section 183 BNSS, which confirmed her consent to the relationship. This consent was pivotal, as it negated any element of coercion or wrongful intent on the part of the accused.
-
Settlement Between Parties: The Court observed that the parties had amicably settled the dispute through a matrimonial alliance. In such cases, the Court has consistently held that continuation of criminal proceedings would serve no purpose other than harassing the accused.
-
Abuse of Process: The Court reiterated the principle that criminal law should not be used as a tool for harassment where no offence is made out. It held that quashing the FIR was necessary to prevent an abuse of the process of law.
"In view of the parties agreeing to not press the charges and the victim being above 18 years of age in terms of the birth certificate, continuation of the proceedings would be nothing but an abuse of process of law."
The Verdict
The Allahabad High Court allowed the writ petition and quashed FIR No. 0337 of 2026 registered under Section 137(2) of the BNS. The Court directed that:
- The FIR stands quashed with immediate effect
- The petitioners may move an application for the release of the arrested son, supported by a certified copy of this order
- No further proceedings shall be initiated based on the quashed FIR
What This Means For Similar Cases
Consent and Age Are Determinative Factors
- Section 137(2) BNS criminalizes the enticement of a minor. Where the victim is above 18 years, the offence is not made out
- Victim’s consent is a critical factor in negating the offence. Practitioners must ensure that statements under Section 183 BNSS are obtained to establish consent
Settlement Can Quash Proceedings
- Courts are inclined to quash FIRs where parties settle disputes amicably, especially in cases involving matrimonial alliances
- Abuse of process is a valid ground for quashing, particularly where no offence is made out and continuation would lead to harassment
Documentary Evidence Overrides Allegations
- Birth certificates and other documentary evidence take precedence over allegations in the FIR regarding age
- Practitioners should always verify the victim’s age through official documents before proceeding with charges under Section 137(2) BNS
