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.
Page 2 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
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 Page 3 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 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 Page 4 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 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 Page 5 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 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.
Page 6 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
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 Page 7 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 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.
Page 8 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 N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.
ksa-2 Crl.O.P.No.27615 of 2025 10.10.2025 Page 9 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/10/2025 04:04:55 pm )