Madras High Court
Mahendran vs The Inspector Of Police on 10 October, 2025
Author: N. Sathish Kumar
Bench: N. Sathish Kumar
Crl.O.P.No.27615 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10.10.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR
Crl.O.P.No.27615 of 2025
Mahendran ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police
All Women Police Station Central
Coimbatore,
Coimbatore District
(Crime No.16 of 2021)
2. (Redacted) ... Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS to
call for the records relating to the case in Spl.S.C.No.87 of 2022 pending on
the file of the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act,
Coimbatore and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.S.Govarthan
For R1 : Mr.R.Vinothraja
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
Page 1 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/10/2025 04:04:55 pm )
Crl.O.P.No.27615 of 2025
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the
proceedings in Spl.S.C.No.87 of 2022 pending on the file of the Special
Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Coimbatore on the
ground of compromise.
2. The crux of the prosecution case is that when the victim girl/defacto
complainant was a minor, the petitioner had sexual intercourse with her and
subsequently, performed child marriage with the victim girl. Therefore, the
petitioner has been charged for the offences under Sections 5(l), 5(j)(ii) and 6
of POCSO Act, Section 9 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act and Sections
366, 344 and 376(3) of IPC.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the victim girl
has attained majority and now the petitioner and the defacto complainant are
living together and that they have got a male child. Therefore, he seeks to
quash the proceedings against the petitioner based on the Joint Memo of
Compromise filed by the parties.
4. The petitioner and the victim girl/defacto complainant were present
before this Court at the time of hearing and they were identified by the
learned counsel for the petitioner as well as by Ms.Abinaya (W.Gr.I 1586)
All Women Police Station Central, Coimbatore.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/10/2025 04:04:55 pm )
5. This Court examined the victim girl/defact complainant and she
stated that she is living together with the petitioner and prayed to quash the
criminal proceedings against the petitioner. A Joint Memo of Compromise
dated 16.09.2025 has also been filed to that effect.
6. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. 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 offence
of this nature can be quashed on the ground of compromise between parties.
7. 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 here under 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/10/2025 04:04:55 pm )
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
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/10/2025 04:04:55 pm )
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 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”.
8. Following the above judgment, this Court has quashed the final
report in Crl.O.P.No.232 of 2021 dated 27.01.2021 [Vijayalakshmi and
another Vs. State Represented by the Inspector of Police, All Women
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/10/2025 04:04:55 pm )
Police Station, Erode and another].
9. In the present case, the very complaint has been registered against
the petitioner when the defacto complainant was admitted in the hospital for
delivery, through the information given by the hospital authorities since the
victim girl was a minor at that time. Now the petitioner and the victim girl
are living together and a male child has been born to them.
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 petitioner. The Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujrat,
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 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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/10/2025 04:04:55 pm )
11. In the present case, the offences in question are purely
individual/personal in nature. It involves the petitioner and the second
respondent and their respective families only. Quashing the proceedings, will
not affect any overriding public interest in this case and it will in fact pave
way for the victim girl to settle down in her life and look for better future
prospects. No useful purpose will be served in continuing with the criminal
proceedings and keeping these proceedings pending will only swell the
mental agony of the petitioner, victim girl and their parents as well.
12. In view of the above, this Court is inclined to quash the criminal
proceedings against the petitioner in Spl.S.C.No.87 of 2022 pending on the
file of the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act,
Coimbatore in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482/Cr.P.C/528 of
BNSS.
13. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the
criminal proceedings against the petitioner in Spl.S.C.No.87 of 2022 pending
on the file of the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO
Act, Coimbatore, is quashed. The Joint Memo of Compromise dated
16.09.2025 filed by the parties to compromise the offence shall form part of
the record.
10.10.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/10/2025 04:04:55 pm )
ksa-2
Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Internet:Yes
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
To
1.The Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act,
Coimbatore
2.The Inspector of Police
All Women Police Station Central
Coimbatore,
Coimbatore District
3.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/10/2025 04:04:55 pm )
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.
ksa-2
10.10.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/10/2025 04:04:55 pm )
