IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 18.08.2025 CORAM:

THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN and Crl.M.P.Nos.15678 & 15679 of 2025 Dr.K.M.Jothiraj ... Petitioner/Accused No.3 -vs-

State Represented by The Inspector of Police Odiansalai Police Station, Puducherry.

Represented through Special Public Prosecutor Cr.No.24/2024 ... Respondent PRAYER: This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 438 r/w. 442 of BNSS Act, to set aside the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.95 of 2025 in Spl.S.C.No.15 of 2024 dated 18.07.2025 on the file of the Fast Track Court Exclusively to deal with offence under the POCSO Act at Puducherry.

For Petitioner : Mr.E.Vijay Anand For Respondent : Mr.K.S.Mohandass Public Prosecutor (Puducherry)

ORDER

This criminal revision has been filed as against the order dated

18.07.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.95 of 2025 in Spl.S.C.No.15 of 2024 on the file of the Fast Track Court Exclusively to deal with offences under the POCSO Act at Puducherry, thereby dismissing the discharge petition filed by the petitioner.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the first accused by name Sakthibala, who was working as a painter, lured the minor victim girl under the pretext of love and he had penetrative sexual assault with the minor victim girl on various occasions and as a consequence, she got pregnant. Thereafter, on 22.01.2024, the victim minor girl along with her mother, the de facto complainant, went to the fourth accused who is a Gynecologist and she opined to have pregnancy test with UPT kit and the minor victim girl was reported positive with pregnancy. On 23.01.2024, the victim along with her mother, consulted the second accused who is also a Gynecologist, to obtain an opinion about her pregnancy. After knowing that the victim is a minor and is pregnant, the 2nd accused referred the victim to take a scan at Sono Scan Centre, Puducherry, where the petitioner / third accused is working as a Radiologist. On recommendation, the petitioner had taken USG scan for the victim girl and gave the scan report to her. Thereafter, the victim girl continued her regular check up with the 2nd accused. Initially, the FIR was registered as against the first accused in Crime No.24 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 6 & 21 of POCSO Act r/w. Section 366 of IPC. During the investigation, the accused 2, 3 and 4 were implicated as accused for the reason that they have treated the minor victim girl, even after knowing that the victim girl was aged about only 15 years.

3. After completion of investigation, the respondent police filed a final report and the same was taken cognizance by the trial Court in Special C.C No.15 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 366 IPC against the first accused and the accused 2,3 & 4 are charged for the offence under Section 21 of POCSO Act. Therefore, the petitioner filed a petition to discharge him from all the charges on the ground that he did not know the age of the victim girl. However, the trial Court had dismissed the discharge petition. Hence, the present revision is filed.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there are totally four accused in which the petitioner is arrayed as 3rd accused. The petitioner is a Radiologist in Sono Scan Centre, Puducherry and the victim girl along with his mother went to take USG scan with the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner has taken the USG Scan and gave the reports to the victim. Thereafter, the victim girl went to second accused for further treatment. Therefore, the petitioner had got nothing to do with the crime as alleged by the prosecution. While pending investigation, the petitioner has been implicated as an accused alleging that the petitioner has failed to provide any information to the concerned authorities, despite having the knowledge that the victim was a minor and she was subjected to penetrative sexual assault under the POCSO Act. There is absolutely no m