The court dismisses the petition as the allegations suggest a prima facie case for trial under the POCSO Act.

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN Crl.O.P.No.13899 of 2025 --

E.Ranganathan .. Petitioner Vs.

State Rep. by

1.The Inspector of Police, W-7, Anna Nagar All Women Police Station, Anna Nagar, Chennai - 40. (Crimem No."51" of 2024)

2.Mrs.Roobi .. Respondents Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to call for the records in Spl.SC.No.42 of 2025, on the file of the Sessions Judge Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Chennai and quash the same.

For petitioner : Mr.N.Kannan For respondents : Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate (Crimineal Side) for R1 ORDER This Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings in Special S.C.No.42 of 2025 pending before the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under the POCSO Act, Chennai, arising out of Crime No.51 of 2024 registered by the All Women Police Station, Anna Nagar, for offences under Section 9(m) r/w 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (as amended), and Sections

296(b) and 351(1) of the BNS Act , 2023.

2. The brief facts, as seen from the records, are that a complaint was lodged by the second respondent on 03.12.2024 stating that her minor daughter, aged 11 years and studying in Class VI, had expressed reluctance to attend tuition on account of the alleged conduct of the petitioner, a neighbour. It was alleged that the petitioner used to intercept the child on her way to tuition, grab her ear, and touch her inappropriately. It was further stated that on 29.11.2024, the petitioner, while in an inebriated condition, had a verbal altercation with the complainant’s sister and allegedly used abusive language and threatened the minor girl for having complained to her mother. Based on the said complaint, an FIR was registered, and after investigation, a final report was filed which was taken on file in Special S.C.No.42 of 2025 and is now pending for trial.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations in the complaint, even if accepted in entirety, do not disclose any of the ingredients necessary to attract the offences alleged. He submits that there is no material indicating any sexual intent or conduct that would fall within the scope of Section 9(m) r/w 10 of the POCSO Act. He further submits that the Section 183 BNSS statement of the victim girl does not contain any specific accusation that could amount to sexual assault, and that the entire case is based on a precautionary apprehension expressed by the complainant. It is therefore contended that the continuation of the proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law and is liable to be quashed.

4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent-Police would submit that the allegations in the complaint and the statement recorded during investigation, including the victim’s statement, do prima facie attract the ingredients of the offences under the POCSO Act and BNS. He submits that the materials disclose inappropriate physical contact and verbal abuse by the petitioner, and the matter deserves to be tested in trial.

5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials placed on record.

6. The statement of the victim girl recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS Act refers to the petitioner grabbing her ear, touching her body, placing his hand on her shoulder, and hugging her. The complaint also alleges that the petitioner used abusive language and threatened the child. While the petitioner would contend that these do not amount to “sexual assault,” the nature of the alleged physical contact and surrounding circumstances must be appreciated in the