Madras High Court
Dr.Swaramya vs The State Represented By on 26 September, 2024
Author: G.Jayachandran
Bench: G.Jayachandran
Crl.O.P.Nos.17060 & 18284 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 26.09.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
Crl.O.P.Nos.17060 & 18284 of 2024
& Crl.M.P.Nos.10258 & 10260 of 2024
& Crl.M.P.Nos.10802 & 10804 of 2024
Crl.O.P.No.17060 of 2024
Dr.Swaramya. ... Petitioner/Accused No.4
-vs-
1. The State represented by,
The Inspector of Police,
Odiansalai Police Station,
Puducherry. ... Respondent/Complainant
2. Mrs.Senthamarai. ... Respondent/defacto Complainant
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call
for the records in Special Sessions Case No.15 of 2024 pending on the file of
the Learned Fast Track Court Exclusively to deal with offences under the
POCSO Act, Puducherry, quash all further proceedings in the said case in
Special Sessions Case No.15/2024 as against her and other suitable appropriate
orders.
For Petitioner : Mr.Swami Subramanian
For Respondent : Mr.M.V.Ramachandramurthy
Additional Public Prosecutor (Pondy).
Assisted by Mr.A.Alexandar, G.A.
Crl.O.P.No.18284 of 2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
Crl.O.P.Nos.17060 & 18284 of 2024
Dr.K.M.Jothiraj. .... Petitioner/Accused No.3
-vs-
1. The State represented by,
The Inspector of Police,
Odiansalai Police Station,
Puducherry. ... 1st Respondent/Complainant
2. Senthamarai. ... 2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call
for the records on the file of the Hon'ble Special Judge for POCSO Act,
Puducherry in Spl.S.C.No.15 of 2024 and quash the final report in the said
SPL.S.C.No.15/2024 as against the petitioner/3rd accused.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.P.Rajesh
For Respondent : Mr.M.V.Ramachandramurthy
Additional Public Prosecutor (Pondy).
Assisted by Mr.A.Alexandar, G.A.
COMMONORDER
A minor girl aged about 15 years was noticed sick and vomiting by
her mother on 20.01.2024 and she was taken to New Medical Centre where the
family Gynaecologists Dr.Nithya practise. Since the said Doctor was not there,
a duty doctor K.Swaramya examined her physically and advised the patient to
take blood test and urine test, to verify whether the minor girl is pregnant.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.Nos.17060 & 18284 of 2024
Thereafter, the minor girl was taken to one Dr.Shanthy Michael on 23.01.2024
who had directed the mother of the minor girl to taken the child for scan and get
the report. Accordingly, the child was take to one Dr.K.M.Jothiraj, who had
taken the scan and given the report to the mother of the minor girl. On seeing
the scan report, Dr.Shanthy Michael, has referred the patient to Ashwin
Hospital. The Doctor Chitra Banu of Ashwin Hospital had intimated the matter
to the Police and National Child Welfare Authorities in compliance with
Section 19 of POCSO Act.
2. The police had filed final report against one M.Sakthi Bala, the
perpetrator of the crime as well as the Doctors who had examined the child
when the mother took her to those doctors for treatment. Earlier, when the quash
petition filed by Dr.Shanthy Michael, this Court, on perusing the record finds
that when the patient was examined by her, she was not aware whether she was
pregnant and she had referred the patient to the Ashwin Hospital. The doctor in
the Ashwin Hospital rightly and duly intimated about the offence to the police
and therefore, quashed the case against Dr.Shanthy Michael.
3. Citing the said judgment, Dr.Swaramya who was the first person
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.Nos.17060 & 18284 of 2024
who examined the victim at New Medical Centre as well as Dr.Jothi Raj, the
owner of the Sono Scan Centre are before this Court to quash the case against
them.
4. The statement of witnesses and the sequence of event clearly
show that the offence of penetrative sexual offence on a minor child been
confirmed only after the scan of fetus by Dr.Jothi Raji, Proprietor of the Sona
Scan Centre. He is the person who should have first intimated to the police or
other authorities as per Section 19 of POCSO Act but has failed to do so. Only
after the victim child taken to Ashwin Hospital, the Doctor in the Ashwin
Hospital along with the scan report had reported the matter to the Police.
5. In the chain of event, this Court finds that Dr.Swaramya, who
examined the child on 20.01.2024 had no specific knowledge about the
penetrative sexual offence. She had asked the patient to undergo blood test,
urine test and UPT test, it was only suspicion but not concrete opinion.
Therefore, Dr.Swaramya cannot be fixed for the offence under Section 19 of
POCSO Act for not intimating the crime.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.Nos.17060 & 18284 of 2024
6. Whereas, Dr.Jothi Raj, who is the petitioner in
Crl.O.P.No.18284 of 2024 after taking scan of the fetus, had clear knowledge
about the pregnancy and about the age of the victim. In the said circumstances,
Dr.Jothi Raj, should not have hesitated to inform the matter to the Police or
concern authorities. Failure to intimate the matter to the concern authorities,
attract offence under Section 19 of POCSO Act.
7. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition No.17060 of 2024
is Allowed. The complaint in Spl.S.C.No.15/2024 filed by Dr.Swarnya is hereby
set aside and the Criminal Original Petition No.18284 of 2024 filed by
Dr.Jothi Raj stands dismissed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous
Petitions are closed.
26.09.2024
Index : Yes/No.
Interest :Yes/No.
bsm
To:-
1. The Special Judge (POCSO Cases), Puducherry.
2. The Inspector of Police, Odiansalai Police Station, Puducherry.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.Nos.17060 & 18284 of 2024
bsm
Crl.O.P.Nos.17060 & 18284 of 2024
26.09.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
