IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. Nirmal Kumar, J.
Surendhar - Petitioner
Versus
State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Bommidi Police Station - Respondent
Crl.O.P.No.5586 of 2026 and Crl.M.P.Nos.4214 & 4216 of 2026
Decided On : 16-03-2026
ORDER :
M. Nirmal Kumar, J.
The petitioner/accused in Spl.S.C.No.46 of 2023 facing trial for the offence under Sections 366, 363 IPC and Sections 5(l) and 6(1) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act), filed this quash petition.
2.The brief facts of the case is that the second respondent/defacto complainant/father of the victim girl lodged a complaint on 17.05.2022 stating that his younger daughter aged about 17th years studying 12th Standard in Government Higher Secondary School, Bairnatham. On 16.05.2022 at about 5.30 p.m., the victim girl went to tuition class, at that time, the petitioner who belongs to Bairnatham Village by sugar coated words forcibly took the victim girl. Hence, complaint lodged and case in Crime No.111 of 2022 for the offence under Section 366 IPC registered. The Inspector of Police took up investigation and was making search for the victim girl. On 17.05.2022 at about 1.30 p.m. the petitioner's relative brought the victim girl in a car and produced her in the Police Station. At that time, the victim's parents were present in the Police Station. When the victim girl was enquired, she informed that she went to the tuition centre at Bairnatham and near the tuition centre there is a Bakery, the petitioner called her to come to the said Bakery. The petitioner and the victim were in love with each other for six months and they knew each other. Thereafter the victim met the petitioner and the victim was thereafter forcibly taken by the petitioner to Paraiyapatti where the victim was made to stay in the room of petitioner's friend and on the next day, on coming to know about the police complaint the victim was brought to the Police Station. Further, the victim disclosed that she belongs to Udayar community and the petitioner belongs to Adi Dravidar community and despite the same, they were having love affair. On 12.03.2022, the victim girl went to tuition centre, at that time, the petitioner informed that without seeing her and speaking to her, he is feeling dejected and informed that he would come to the Baby School which is next to the victim's house and wait for her. On 13.04.2022 at about 4.00 a.m., the victim went to the School, met the petitioner and he promised the victim girl that he would marry her. The victim objected and stated that after completing her 12th standard, proposal of marriage can be considered but the petitioner forcibly committed penetrative sexual assault on 13.04.2022 and again thereafter on 25.04.2022. The victim's statement and her parents' statement recorded. The respondent police visited the scene of occurrence, prepared observation mahazar, rough sketch in the presence of witnesses and the victim's school certificate committed from Assistant Head Master of Government Higher Secondary School, Bairnatham confirming that the victim's date of birth was 22.11.2004 and she was a minor. The victim was examined by Doctor attached to Government Hospital, Aroor on 17.05.2022 at about 7.20 p.m. Thereafter, sections were altered to offence under Sections 366, 363 IPC and Section 5(l) and 6 of POCSO Act. The petitioner was arrested on 20.05.2022 and on his confession, the bike was seized. The petitioner was produced for medical examination on 30.05.2022, potency certificate collected and the victim was also produced before the Magistrate, 164 statement recorded on 27.05.2022. On completion of investigation, charge sheet filed listing LW1 to LW22 and documents.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner and the victim, both studied in the same School but in different classes, they were interested in each other, had a love affair and they were regularly meeting and were conversing. Both the petitioner and the victim belong to different communities and their social background was an obstacle to their relationship. The victim was in mad of love with the petitioner and she used to call the petitioner to come near her house early in the morning, the
Quashing proceedings justified post-compromise, victim's majority, marriage, pregnancy to avoid abuse of process.
Quashing non-compoundable POCSO/child marriage proceedings permissible post-compromise, DNA exclusion, and no public interest.
The court ruled that in cases of alleged abduction and sexual assault, the prosecution must conclusively establish the victim's age and the absence of consent to support convictions, particularly und....
Court may quash POCSO proceedings based on subsequent developments affecting the marriage status and family stability of involved parties.
Courts should consider subsequent events in POCSO and rape cases when deciding quash petitions, especially in tribal customs.
The appellant was convicted under the POCSO Act and IPC, with the court affirming the victim's status as a child and dismissing arguments regarding consent and evidence discrepancies.
The conviction of the appellant was upheld based on reliable victim testimony corroborated by medical evidence, affirming the gravity of offenses under the POCSO Act and IPC.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.