The Delhi High Court has refused to quash a child-sexual-offence prosecution solely because the complainant later married the accused and wished to preserve their family.
In X v State, decided on 1 October 2026, the case began when the girl, then under 17, disappeared from home. She was later found pregnant and said she had left voluntarily with the petitioner. After attaining majority, she married him; they now have a child and both she and her mother supported ending the case.
Justice Sanjeev Narula held that consent or later family acceptance could not erase the legal consequences of alleged sexual acts during childhood. The investigation was not shown to be malicious, manifestly false or an abuse of process. A subsequent marriage and compromise therefore did not justify terminating an otherwise sustainable prosecution.
The Court dismissed the quashing petition but preserved the petitioner’s bail. It directed the special court to decide charges and evidence independently, without treating the High Court’s threshold findings as conclusions on guilt.