Chidambaram v. The Inspector of Police,

ORDER

¶1This Criminal Original Petition seeks to quash the proceedings in Spl.SC.No.32 of 2022 on the file of the Special Judge, POCSO, Krishnagiri District for alleged offences under Sections 5(i), 5(j)(ii), 5(n), 6(1) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, (the POCSO Act) on the ground of compromise between the parties. The parties are present before the court and, on examination, stand by their compromise and do not want the case to proceed further.

¶2The broad contours of the High Court's power to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.p.c. and Section 528 of the BNSS in respect of compromise of non-compoundable offences are laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Gian Singh -Vs-State of Punjab and Another (2012 10 SCC 303)and other subsequent judgments.

¶3This is a serious case under the POCSO Act, with societal ramifications. As such, the Court will not rely solely on the version of the victim child/Prosecutrix but has a duty to consider the entire gamut of facts and attendant circumstances. Page3 of 5

¶4The following circumstances of this case are borne in mind :

(A) A careful perusal of the allegations does not reveal a forceful assault or enticement under direct or indirect pressure, but the offence arises out of a premature adolescent romantic relationship rooted in mutual innocence and biological attraction;

(B) The victim child's date of birth is taken into account, and she has now turned a major;

(C) It is submitted that the accused and the victim are married, share an emotional bond, and live as a family;

(D) They have two children born to them;

(E) The accused is working as Labour in a Private Company and the family is eking out a lawful livelihood.

¶5The fact that the prosecutrix or the family members are no longer interested in the prosecution, that they are not going to co-operate with the prosecution, and that there is no likelihood of a meaningful trial is also taken into account.

¶6This Court, in Vijayalakshmi and Another -Vs-State (2021 SCCOnline Mad 317), has already taken the view that such adolescent relationships should not result in the incarceration of the boy alone and has called for appropriate legislative action to deal with these cases separately. Page4 of 5

¶7The purpose of exercising extraordinary power is to maintain social order. The very purpose behind the POCSO Act will be lost if the trial is allowed to proceed in the instant case, which is, pure and simple, a private relationship between the accused and the victim child.

¶8For all the above reasons, Crl.O.P. No.18363 of 2026, is allowed. The proceedings in Spl.S.C.No.32 of 2022 on the file of the Special Judge, POCSO, Krishnagiri District stands quashed. Consequently, connected Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 13-07-2026 RPP To

1.The Special Judge, POCSO, Krishnagiri District.

¶2The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Hosur, Krishnagiri Dt.

¶3The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. CRLoOPoNo.o18363oofo2026 D.BHARATHAoCHAKRAVARTHYoJ. RPP CRLoOPoNo.o18363oofo2026 AND CRLoMPoNO.o12221oOFo2026,CRLoMPoNO.o12220oOFo2026 13-07-2026 Page5oofo5

Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 13-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY AND CRL MP NO. 12221 OF 2026,CRL MP NO. 12220 OF 2026 Chidambaram S/o Sakkan, No.4/26, Bannihalli, Kendenahalli Village, Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri District. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Hosur, Krishnagiri. Cr.No.10 of 2022. 2. Sridevi W/o. Chidambaram, D/o. Ramamoorthy, No.528, Parvathi Nagar, Hosur, Krishnagiri. ..Respondent(s) PRAYER Criminal Original Petition filed under Sec.528 of B.N.S.S. 2023, praying to call for the records and quash the proceedings in Spl.SC.No.32 of 2022 pending on the file of Special Judge, POCSO, Krishnagiri. For Petitioner(s): Mr. M.Selvam For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Rajasekaran, Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side) for R1 Page2 of 5