The court can quash non-compoundable offences if they are purely individual in nature and do not affect overriding public interest.

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in connection with Spl.S.C.No.126 of 2023 for the offences under Sections 366 and 344 of IPC , Sections 5 (l), 6 and 17 of POCSO Act and Sections 9 , 10, of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act , pending on the file of Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Cuddalore, Cuddalore District on the ground of compromise.

2. The crux of the allegations is that at the time of alleged occurrence i.e. on 28.03.2023, the victim girl was aged 17 ½ years. The victim girl while studying in school, had developed connection with the first petitioner and they are said to have married with the help of the second petitioner who is the paternal uncle of first petitioner. Thereby, the accused are prosecuted based on the complaint lodged by the second respondent/father of the victim girl.

3. Now it is stated by both sides that the victim girl has attained majority and she is at the advanced stage of pregnancy and to compromise the issue, the victim girl has filed a joint compromise memo dated

05.03.2025.

4. The petitioners and the victim girl were present before this Court at the time of hearing and they were identified by their respective counsel as well as by Ms.P.Thirumathi, Women Head Constable, Karuveppilankurichi Police Station, Virudhachalam. This Court examined the victim girl and she stated that she is living together with the first petitioner and prayed to quash the criminal proceedings against the petitioners. A Joint Compromise Memo dated 05.03.2025 has also been filed to that effect by the petitioners and the victim girl.

5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) 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.

6. 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 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