S v. The State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. ____ OF 2026
(arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 9177/2026)

S ..... APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... RESPONDENT(S)

[NyayVidhan note: this order concerns a case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 376 IPC in which the victim was a minor, so it is published anonymised. The appellant, whom the victim later married, is shown as S. His name, the number and date of the FIR, the police station, the number of the sessions case, the dates of the marriage and of the child's birth, and the town where the family lives are withheld here and in the PDF hosted on this site. The order does not name the victim, her father or the child. Paragraphs 1-12 carry the Court's numbers; the closing line on pending applications is unnumbered in the print. Footnote 1 of the order is given as [1] at the end of the signed order. The appeal number is left blank in the signed order. The record of proceedings of 28.10.2026, which follows the signed order, is given in abridged form, with the list of counsel on one line for each side and its order on one line. The digital-signature block (dated 29.10.2026), Registry signatures, running feet and page numbers are left out. The order's own wording is otherwise kept as printed.]

[Source: Supreme Court of India, www.sci.gov.in — order dated 28 October 2026.]

O R D E R

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellant, S, is aggrieved by the judgment dated 07.05.2026, passed by the High Court of Delhi, dismissing his quash petition in Crl.M.C. No. 2001/2026. By way of the said petition, the appellant had sought quashing of First Information Report (FIR) No. [number withheld] dated [date withheld] registered with Police Station – [place withheld], District – Dwarka, Delhi, initially for the offence punishable under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860[1]. Offences under Sections 376 and 506 of the IPC along with Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, were added later. The ground for seeking such relief was that the matter had been settled between the parties.

3. The aforestated FIR was registered by the father, respondent No. 2, alleging that his daughter, respondent No. 3, who was then aged 16 years, had been lured away by an unknown individual. She is stated to have returned on her own thereafter and the FIR was registered against the appellant, S.

4. While so, it appears that the appellant, S, got married to respondent No. 3 on [date withheld]. A daughter was born to them on [date withheld]. Citing these facts, the appellant sought quashing of the aforestated FIR. However, the High Court was not inclined to show any favour to the appellant, considering the fact that respondent No. 3 was a minor at the point of time the offence was allegedly committed. Further, the High Court noted that the appellant had violated the condition imposed when he was granted bail, to the effect that he should not try to meet or contact the victim and her family members. Holding so, the High Court dismissed the quash petition.

5. While issuing notice in this matter, this Court stayed further proceedings in Sessions Case No. [number withheld] on the file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-01 (POCSO), Dwarka Courts, New Delhi, which arose out of the subject FIR. After service of notice, respondent Nos. 2 and 3 appeared in person through video conferencing and supported the appellant, S. By order dated 07.10.2026, the learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the State of NCT of Delhi was requested to ensure that a lady police officer was deputed to visit respondent No. 3 and ascertain whether she was being taken care of and whether she was living happily with the appellant, S.

6. Today, the learned counsel appearing for the State informed us that a lady police officer visited respondent No. 3 and verified her present status. The lady police officer was present in person in Court.

7. Status report signed on 27.10.2026 was placed on record. Therein, the police officer mentioned that she is the Station House Officer (SHO) of the Police Station – [place withheld] and that she visited respondent No. 3, who informed her that she had married the appellant out of her own free will and consent and is presently residing with him and his family at [place withheld]. She also informed her that they had a daughter and that they were all living together happily.

8. Respondent No. 3 appeared online and confirmed what was stated in the status report.

9. Though the offence was allegedly committed at a point of time when the victim was still a minor and this Court would ordinarily not take a lenient view, given the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, we deem it appropriate to exercise our extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to ensure that justice is done, so as to not break up this family at this stage.

10. The appeal is allowed, quashing FIR No. [number withheld] dated [date withheld] registered with Police Station – [place withheld], District – Dwarka, Delhi, and the consequential case arising therefrom, being Sessions Case No. [number withheld] on the file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-01 (POCSO), Dwarka Courts, New Delhi.

11. This decision turns upon the peculiar facts of this case and shall have no precedential value.

12. We may, however, add that if the appellant fails to take care of respondent No.3 or she is ill-treated, it would be open to her to seek reopening of this case.

Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

........................J.
(SANJAY KUMAR)

........................J.
(SANJEEV SACHDEVA)

NEW DELHI;
OCTOBER 28, 2026.

Footnotes
[1] “IPC”, for short

ITEM NO.15 COURT NO.8 SECTION II-D

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 9177/2026
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 07-05-2026 in CRLMC No. 2001/2026 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi]

S Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. Respondent(s)

Date : 28-10-2026 This matter was called on for hearing today.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Neha Rai- 3961, AOR Mr. Rohit Yadav, Adv. Mr. Shivam Shivhare, Adv. Mr. Harshit, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Davinder Pal Singh, A.S.G. (N/P) Ms. Shreya Dutt, Adv. Mr. Shreekant Neelappa Terdal- 909, AOR Mr. Rajan Kumar Chourasia, Adv. Mr. Digvijay Dam, Adv. Mr. B.K. Satija, Adv. Mr. Madahv Sinhal, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following ORDER: Leave granted. In terms of the signed order, the appeal is allowed, quashing FIR No. [number withheld] dated [date withheld] registered with Police Station – [place withheld], District – Dwarka, Delhi, and the consequential case arising therefrom, being Sessions Case No. [number withheld] on the file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-01 (POCSO), Dwarka Courts, New Delhi. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

(signed order is placed on the file)