O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.14 of 2018 on the file of Judicial Magistrate Court No.VI, Coimbatore.

2. The petitioner, who is facing trial on a private complaint filed by the respondent for the offence under Section 74(3) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Childrens) Act, 2015 (J.J. Act), has filed this quash petition. The petitioner had now filed a memo informing the Court that C.C.No.14 of 2018 was transferred to the Court of the Judicial Magistrate-II, Coimbatore and renumbered as C.C.No.1396 of 2019 and the same is pending.

3. The gist of the case is that on 01.01.2017 at about 11.00 a.m., when the respondent/complainant was in his house along with his friends, he came across a report in “Dinamalar” daily paper, Erode edition dated 18.07.2016. At page No.6 of the daily, the petitioner published a news item under the caption “9 taJ rpWkpia brf;!; gyhj;fhuk; bra;a Kaw;rp. bjhHpyhsp ifJ”. The respondent was shocked and surprised to see such news published in the daily newspaper, which has wide circulation in the state of Tamil Nadu. The victim in this case is a 9 years old child. The victim's grandmother name had been published. Further, the victim is a 4th standard school going child and due to the publication of the such item, the petitioner had committed an offence under Section 74(3) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The respondent sent a lawyer notice on 09.01.2017 to the petitioner calling for explanation as to why he should not be prosecuted. The legal notice dated 09.01.2017 was received by the petitioner on 11.01.2017. Thereafter, no reply was forthcoming. Hence, a complaint was lodged on 23.02.2017. Initially, respondent/complainant's sworn, statement recorded. Thereafter, the respondent side witnesses, namely, C.W.1-P.Ravindran and C.W.2-P.Suresh were recorded. The trial Court, satisfying, prima facie case is made out, took the complaint on file, issued summons to the petitioner, against which, the petitioner has filed this quash petition.

4. The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner along with his brothers, is running the Tamil daily newspaper “Dinamalar”. The petitioner is in-charge of the Erode and Salem editions as its Editor, Printer and Publisher. There are 10 editions of “Dinamalar”. The petitioner had commenced his journey with the newspaper nearly 50 years ago. He worked as Assistant to his father, late T.V.Ramasubbiyer and thereafter rose to the level of Editor. The newspaper got wide circulation and following, on an average, nearly 300 news items are published daily. The daily circulation of the newspaper in Tamil Nadu is about 9 lakh copies per day. In the Erode edition of the newspaper dated 18.07.2016, a news item was published with regard to an attempt of molestation of a 9 years old minor girl and the arrest of a worker. The petitioner submits that the press report about the sexual assault was released by the concerned police. Since the victim was of 9 years old minor girl, it has become a sensational in the locality. Further, there was an apprehension that no person's life and property is secured. To bring confidence and faith over the police, the police released the press report informing the public about the steps taken in securing the accused. The petitioner had published the press report issued by the concerned police. It is apparent from the report that the particulars found therein are provided by the police, which was published. Further, the respondent had not called upon the concerned police, why such press release was given. On the other hand, proceeded against the petitioner for obvious reason, pressurising the petitioner to come for some settlement. The respondent had sent a notice, in which it was alleged that the petitioner committed an offence under Section 23 of the POCSO Act. The petitioner on receipt of notice, sent a reply, wherein, the petitioner had shown h