The Madras High Court quashes POCSO case registered against a young man after he married the prosecutrix and the couple started a family. The Court observed that continuing such proceedings would serve no public purpose and only cause mental agony to both parties.
The order was passed by Justice N. Sathish Kumar, who presided over the matter involving petitioner Kamaraj from Perambalur District, Tamil Nadu. The case arose from an FIR lodged in 2023 under Sections 5(1), 5(j)(ii), and 6 of the POCSO Act, alleging penetrative sexual assault upon a 17-year-old girl.
According to the prosecution, the petitioner had been in a romantic relationship with the minor, which later led to her pregnancy. Following a complaint filed by the girl’s mother, the police registered the case. Subsequently, the petitioner and the girl solemnised their marriage and became parents to a baby girl.
Both the survivor and her mother personally appeared before the High Court and filed a joint compromise memo, affirming that the couple was living peacefully and expressing their desire to put an end to the criminal proceedings. They urged the Court to consider the welfare of the family and their child’s future.
The Government Advocate, however, opposed the plea, asserting that offences under the POCSO Act are grave and cannot be routinely quashed merely on settlement between the parties, as the statute is intended to protect minors from sexual exploitation.
Justice Sathish Kumar, while acknowledging the gravity of such offences, emphasized that each case must be examined on its unique factual foundation. Referring to the 2019 precedent in Sabari v. Inspector of Police, the Court reiterated that consensual relationships between adolescents aged 16 to 18 years often lead to prosecutions under the POCSO Act, even where consent is present in fact though not in law.
The learned Judge observed that many such cases stem from
“mutual innocence and biological attraction rather than predatory intent.”
In this backdrop, the Court deemed it fit to exercise its inherent powers to prevent misuse of the criminal process, particularly when the parties have since married and are leading a settled life.
The Bench also cited Supreme Court rulings in Parbathbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Dhruv Gurjar, which clarify that while quashing of non-compoundable offences is an exception, courts may exercise such power when the dispute is personal in nature and does not adversely affect the public interest.
Applying these settled principles, Justice Sathish Kumar concluded that the present case concerns the personal lives of two young individuals who are now married and nurturing a child. The Court noted that continuing the prosecution would not advance the object of justice but would only “prolong the agony of both parties.”
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the petition and quashed the FIR, directing that the joint compromise memo dated October 9, 2025 shall form part of the record.
Bench and Case Details:
- Court: Madras High Court
- Bench: Hon’ble Justice N. Sathish Kumar
- Petitioner: Kamaraj (Perambalur District)
- Respondents: State of Tamil Nadu, All Women Police Station, Perambalur
- Date of Order: October 29, 2025
- Provisions Involved: Sections 5(1), 5(j)(ii), and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012
Follow The Legal QnA For More Updates…