Madras High Court
V.Muthu @ Thukamuthu vs The State Represented By ... on 15 September, 2022
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.15673 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 15.09.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
CRL.O.P(MD)No.15673 of 2022
1.V.Muthu @ Thukamuthu
2.Selvi ...Petitioners
vs.
1.The State represented by Inspector of Police,
Munneerpallam Police Station,
Tirunelveli City. (Cr.No.79/2019)
2.Subramaniam
3.XXXX ...Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C,
praying to call for the records of impugned charge sheet in
Spl.C.C.No.60 of 2020 on the file of the Special Court for the
Exclusive Trial of POCSO Act cases, Tirunelveli and to quash the
same.
For Petitioners :Mr.V.M.Jegadeesha Pandian
For R1 :Mr.A.Albert James
Government Advocate
For R3 :Mr.S.Maharaja
*****
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.15673 of 2022
ORDER
Heard Mr.V.M.Jegadeesha Pandian, learned Counsel for the
Petitioners, Mr.A.Albert James, learned Government Advocate,
appearing for the first Respondent and Mr.S.Maharaja, learned
Counsel for the third Respondent.
2.The Petitioners are the parents of the accused as per the
prosecution case. The accused, who is the son of the Petitioners, had
developed love with his maternal uncle's daughter. Both are in the
same village. Both are neighbours. In due course of the love, they
developed physical intimacy, which resulted in the victim becoming
pregnant. Only at the advanced stage of pregnancy, the parents of
the victim and the parents of the accused were aware of the
development. Therefore, they had performed marriage of the accused
with the victim in the family deity temple.
3.The case of the minor became pregnant came to the outer
world only when she was subjected to medical examination before the
Doctors. The Doctors in the Government hospital, who examined the
minor victim, had informed the Police regarding the offences
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.15673 of 2022
committed on the minor. Therefore, the Police presumed to have
approached the Village Administrative Officer of Ponnakudi village,
who had given the police complaint. Based on which, an FIR has been
registered. After the registration of the case, the investigation
proceeded in laying of the final report. In the final report, the case
against the accused was split up and laid before the Juvenile Justice
Board, since the accused had not completed the age of 18.
4.The parents of the accused, who had performed marriage to
the accused with the victim, were arrayed as accused Nos.2 and 3 by
invoking the provisions of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.
Therefore, they are arrayed as accused before the Sessions Court,
Special Court for POCSO offences.
5.It is the submission of the learned Counsel for the Petitioners
that the victim is related to the accused as maternal uncle's daughter.
After attaining the age of majority, the family of the victim and the
family of the accused, who are related to each other, have performed
the marriage of the victim with the accused attained the age of
majority and the victim had delivered a male child. Now the child is
aged three years. Now the Petitioners, the victim and the Petitioners'
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.15673 of 2022
son/accused are living as a joint family.
6.Regarding joint compromise memo and for clarification, the
parties were summoned. The statements of the father of the accused,
[email protected] son of Vel Thevar, 47 years, the mother of the
accused M.Selvi, wife of Muthu, 44 years, the accused,
Shanmugapandi, son of [email protected], who is facing POCSO
charges before the Juvenile Justice Board and the Victim, were also
recorded. The accused, the victim, the parents of the accused were
identified by the Investigation Officer.
7.If the Petitioners are convicted, the family environment will
suffer damage, particularly, the child, who is now aged 3 years, will
lose parental care and the affection of his father and his
grandparents. Therefore, exercising the extraordinary power under
Section 482 Cr.P.C., the case against the Petitioners herein, in
Spl.C.C.No.60 of 2020 on the file of the Special Court for the
Exclusive Trial of POCSO Act cases, Tirunelveli, is quashed in the
light of the judgments of this Court in (a) 2021 (1) MWN (Cr.) 252
(Vijayalakshmi and another and State and (b) 2022 (1) LW Crl.
303 (Agavai vs the State) and in the light of the precedent of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.15673 of 2022
Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in 2021 Scc Online Guj 2961
(Ashwinibhai vs State of Gujarat). Accordingly, the Criminal
Original Petition is allowed accordingly.
Index:Yes/No 15.09.2022
cmr
To
The Inspector of Police,
Munneerpallam Police Station,
Tirunelveli City.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.15673 of 2022
SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP, J.
cmr
CRL.O.P(MD)No.15673 of 2022
15.09.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
