Vinayagam v. The Inspector of Police

ORDER This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the final report filed in Spl.S.C.No.145 of 2025 on the file of the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of cases under POSCO Act, Vellore, Vellore District, for the alleged offences under Sections 5(j)(ii), 5(l), 5(n), 6(1) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, (the POCSO Act), 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 and 366, 376(2)(n) & 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, 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 Page3 of 6 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 girl/Prosecutrix but has a duty to consider the entire gamut of facts and attendant circumstances.

¶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 girl'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; Page4 of 6 d. They have a child born to them; e. The accused is working as a manual labourer 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 SCC Online 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.

¶7The purpose of exercising extraordinary power is to maintain social order. The very purpose behind the POCSO Act will be lost if the Page5 of 6 trial is allowed to proceed in the instant case, which is, pure and simple, a private relationship between the accused and the victim girl.

¶8For all the above reasons, this Criminal Original Petition No.17574 of 2026, is allowed. The final report in Spl.S.C.No.145 of 2025 on the file of the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of cases under POSCO Act, Vellore, Vellore District, stands quashed. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 07-07-2026 Sni To

1.Special Judge, Court for Exclusive Trial of cases under POSCO Act, Vellore District.

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Katpadi, Vellore District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. Page6 of 6

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J. Sni 07-07-2026

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 07-07-2026 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY and CRL.M.P.Nos.11725 of 2026 Vinayagam ..Petitioner Vs. 1. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Katpadi, Vellore District. Crime No.21 of 2025. 2. Chithra Rural Welfare Officer (Magalir), Katpadi Panchayath Unit, Vellore District. ..Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 530 of BNSS, praying to call for the entire records in pursuant to the final report in Spl.S.C.No.145 of 2025 on the file of the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of cases under POSCO Act, Vellore, Vellore District and quash the same. Page2 of 6 For Petitioner : Mr.M.Sathish Kumar For Respondents : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz (For R1) Government Advocate