Madras High Court
Arunkumar vs State Rep. By on 9 October, 2025
Author: N. Sathish Kumar
Bench: N. Sathish Kumar
Crl.O.P.No.16349 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 09.10.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR
Crl.O.P.No.16349 of 2025
Arunkumar ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. State rep. By,
The Inspector of Police,
Padalur Police Station,
Perambalur District.
(Crime No.370 of 2023)
2. XXXX,
D/o.XXXX,
XXXX, XXXX,
Perambalur District. ... Respondents
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS,
to call for the records in connection with the impugned Final Report in
Spl.S.C.No.09 of 2024 on the file of the Learned Sessions Judge, Mahila
Court, Perambalur and quash the same, on the ground of compromise.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Vijaya Ragavan
For Respondents : Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar
Government Advocate (Criminal Side)
(For R1)
R2 – Appeared in person
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/10/2025 03:46:40 pm )
Crl.O.P.No.16349 of 2025
ORDER
The Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the
the impugned Final Report in Spl.S.C.No.09 of 2024 on the file of the
Learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Perambalur on the basis of the
compromise arrived at between the petitioner and the de facto
complainant/second respondent.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the
learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the first
respondent and perused the materials available on record.
3. Based on the complaint given by the de facto complainant/R2,
a case in Crime No.370 of 2023 was registered against the accused for the
offences under Sections 323, 341 and 354D of I.P.C. and U/s.11(iv) and 12
of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. After the
investigation, the 1st respondent Police has laid impugned final report for the
same Sections and the same was taken on file as Spl.S.C.No.09 of 2024 on
the file of the Learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Perambalur and it is
pending for trial.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/10/2025 03:46:40 pm )
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner has amicably settled the dispute with the de facto
complainant/R2 and they have also filed a Joint Memo of Compromise to
that effect. Hence, he prayed to quash the Final Report in Spl.S.C.No.09 of
2024 on the file of the Learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Perambalur
as against petitioner.
5. The petitioner and the de-facto complainant/R2 appeared before
this Court and were identified by their respective counsel as well as by
Mr.M.Kozhanjiyappan, Sub-Inspector, Padalur Police Station, Perambalur
District.
6. On being enquired by this Court, the de facto
complainant/victim girl, stated that she has amicably settled the dispute with
the petitioner and she is not willing to pursue the criminal proceedings
against the petitioner.
7. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing
on behalf of the first respondent submitted that though the parties entered
into a compromise while this case is pending, this Court, taking into account
the seriousness of the offence has to consider the issue as to whether an
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/10/2025 03:46:40 pm )
offence of this nature can be quashed on the ground of compromise between
parties.
8. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
9. In this regard, it is relevant to refer the judgment of the learned
Single Judge of this Court in Sabari v. Inspector of Police reported in 2019
(3) MLJ Crl 110, wherein the learned single Judge had discussed in detail
about the cases in which persons of the age group of 16 to 18 years are
involved in love affairs and how in some cases ultimately end up in a
criminal case booked for an offence under the POSCO Act. The relevant
portions of the judgment are extracted hereunder for proper appreciation:-
“ 21.When this case was taken up for hearing, this
Court became concerned about the growing incidence of
offences under the POCSO Act on one side and also the
Rigorous Imprisonment envisaged in the Act. Sometimes it
happens that such offences are slapped against teenagers,
who fall victim of the application of the POCSO Act at an
young age without understanding the implication of the
severity of the enactment.
26.In addition to the above, this Court is of the view
that 'warning' of attraction of POCSO Act must be displayed
before screening of any film, which have teenage characters
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/10/2025 03:46:40 pm )
suggesting relationship between boy and girl.
27.Apart from the above, this Court is of the view that
as per the 3rd respondent's report, majority of cases are due
to relationship between adolescent boys and girls. Though
under Section 2(d) of the Act, 'Child' is defined as a person
below the age of 18 years and in case of any love affair
between a girl and a boy, where the girl happened to be 16
or 17 years old, either in the school final or entering the
college, the relationship invariably assumes the penal
character by subjecting the boy to the rigorous of POCSO
Act. Once the age of the girl is established in such
relationship as below 18 years, the boy involved in the
relationship is sure to be sentenced 7 years or 10 years as
minimum imprisonment, as the case may be.
28.When the girl below 18 years is involved in a
relationship with the teen age boy or little over the teen age,
it is always a question mark as to how such relationship
could be defined, though such relationship would be the
result of mutual innocence and biological attraction. Such
relationship cannot be construed as an unnatural one or
alien to between relationship of opposite sexes. But in such
cases where the age of the girl is below 18 years, even
though she was capable of giving consent for relationship,
being mentally matured, unfortunately, the provisions of the
POCSO Act get attracted if such relationship transcends
beyond platonic limits, attracting strong arm of law
sanctioned by the provisions of POCSO Act, catching up
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/10/2025 03:46:40 pm )
with the so called offender of sexual assault, warranting a
severe imprisonment of 7/10 years.
29.Therefore, on a profound consideration of the
ground realities, the definition of 'Child' under Section 2(d)
of the POCSO Act can be redefined as 16 instead of 18. Any
consensual sex after the age of 16 or bodily contact or allied
acts can be excluded from the rigorous provisions of the
POCSO Act and such sexual assault, if it is so defined can
be tried under more liberal provision, which can be
introduced in the Act itself and in order to distinguish the
cases of teen age relationship after 16 years, from the cases
of sexual assault on children below 16 years. The Act can be
amended to the effect that the age of the offender ought not
to be more than five years or so than the consensual victim
girl of 16 years or more. So that the impressionable age of
the victim girl cannot be taken advantage of by a person
who is much older and crossed the age of presumable
infatuation or innocence”.
10. The main issue that requires the consideration of this Court is as
to whether this Court can quash the criminal proceedings involving non-
compoundable offences pending against the petitioners. The Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State
of Gujarat, reported in 2017 9 SCC 641 and in case of The State of
Madhya Pradesh Vs. Dhruv Gurjar and Another reported in (2019) 2 MLJ
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/10/2025 03:46:40 pm )
Crl 10, has given sufficient guidelines that must be taken into consideration
by this Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C,
to quash non-compoundable offences. One very important test that has been
laid down is that the Court must necessarily examine if the crime in
question is purely individual in nature or a crime against the society with
overriding public interest. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that
offences against the society with overriding public interest even if it gets
settled between the parties, cannot be quashed by this Court.
11. In the present case, the offences in question are purely
individual/personal in nature. It involves the petitioner, the victim girl and
their respective families only. Quashing the proceedings, will not affect any
overriding public interest in this case. No useful purpose will be served in
continuing with the criminal proceedings and keeping the proceedings
pending will only swell the mental agony of the petitioner, victim girl and
their parents as well. In view of the above, this Court is inclined to quash
the the impugned Final Report in Spl.S.C.No.09 of 2024 on the file of the
Learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Perambalur, in exercise of its
jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/10/2025 03:46:40 pm )
12. The only allegation against the accused is that he allegedly
stalked the 2nd respondent. The petitioner and the 2nd respondent are relatives
and at the time of the alleged incident, the 2nd respondent was a minor, aged
about 16 years and now she had attained majority and both parties have
resolved their differences amicably, this Court is of the view that no useful
purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings.
13. In view of the above, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed
and the final report in Spl.S.C.No.09 of 2024 on the file of the Learned
Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Perambalur, is quashed as against the
petitioner. The Joint Memo of Compromise filed by the petitioner and the
victim girl for compromising the offences shall form part of this order.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
09.10.2025
kak
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
To
1. The Learned Sessions Judge,
Mahila Court, Perambalur.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Padalur Police Station,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/10/2025 03:46:40 pm )
Perambalur District.
3. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/10/2025 03:46:40 pm )
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.
kak
09.10.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/10/2025 03:46:40 pm )
