The court emphasized the need for legislative amendments to address cases involving adolescents in relationships and the implications of the POCSO Act on such situations.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records in pending Trial in Spl.S.C.No.82 of 2021 on the file of the Fast Track Mahila Court, Namakkal and quash the same.)

1. This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in Spl.S.C.No.82 of 2021 on the file of the Fast Track Mahila Court, Namakkal for the offences under sections 366, 324, 498-A of IPC, Section 9 of Child Marriage Act, 2006 and 5[1], 6 of POCSO Act 2012.

2. The allegations against the petitioner is that the petitioner had kidnapped the defacto complainant, who was minor and the petitioner had married her and the defacto complainant had lodged a complaint which culminated into the impugned final report.

3. The second respondent has filed an affidavit before this Court to the effect that the the defacto complainaint and the petitioner married and are living jointly and hence, submitted that the proceedings against them may be quashed. She has also filed Marriage Registration Certificate dated 08.03.2022 and HSC certificate before this Court.

4. Mr.G.Venkatachalam, Velur Police Station was present before this Court and he informed this Court that the second respondent had approached and informed him that since the defacto complainant and the petitioner got married, they do not want to proceed further with the criminal proceedings.

5. The Defacto Complainant/victim girl was also present before this Court at the time of hearing. This Court examined the victim girl/defacto complainant and she stated that there was a love affair between herself and the petitioner and now she is married and living happily and she does not want to continue the criminal proceedings.

6. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing on behalf of the respondent police 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 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 ma