The court emphasized the need to consider the nature of the crime and public interest when quashing non-compoundable offences, and highlighted the need for amendments to the POCSO Act to prevent the stringent application of the Act in cases involving adolescents in relationships.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records relating to the complaint in Spl.S.C.No.20of 2021 on the file of the Fast Track Mahila Court, Dharmapuri and quash the same as far as the petitioners are concerned.)

1. This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in Spl.S.C.No.20of 2021 on the file of the Fast Track Mahila Court, Dharmapuri for the offences under sections 363, 366 of IPC read with Sections 5[1], 6 16, 17, 5[j], [ii] of POCSO Act 2012.

2. The allegations against the petitioners is that the first petitioner along with the second petitioner, who is the friend of the first petitioner, had kidnapped the daughter of the defacto complainant, who is aged about 17 years and the first petitioner married her.

3. The petitioners filed an affidavit before this Court to the effect that the second petitioner is the friend of the first petitioner and the first petitioner and the victim girl got married and are living jointly and they are having one male child out of their wedlock and the second respondent, who is the father of the victim has also accepted them and hence, submitted that the proceedings against them may be quashed.

4. Ms. R.Thangam, Special Sub Inspector of Police was present before this Court and she informed this Court that the second respondent had approached her and informed her that since the defacto complainant and the first petitioner got married, having a child and living together happily, he do not want to proceed further with the criminal proceedings against the petitioners.

5. The Defacto Complainant and the victim girl were also present along with her child before this Court at the time of hearing. This Court examined the victim girl and she stated that there was a love affair between herself and the first petitioner and that she is not willing to undergo this agony any further and wanted the criminal proceedings to be quashed.

6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor 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 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