IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17.02.2026 CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA and Crl.MP.No.2100 of 2026 Imaiyavaram ... Petitioner Vs.

1. State rep. by Inspector Police, Thavalakuppam Police Station, Puducherry.

Crime.No.56 of 2025

2. Nancy ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita/Section 482 Cr.P.C., call for the records in SPl.S.C.No.68 of 2025, on the file of the Sessions Judge, FTC (POCSO Act) at Puducherry and to quash the same.

For Petitioners : Mr.V.P.Chamuraj For R1 : Mr.M.V.Ramachandra Murthy Public Prosecutor, Govt. of Puducherry For R2 : Mr.R.Dhinagaran

O R D E R

The present Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in Spl.SC.No.68 of 2025 on the file of the Sessions Court, FTC (POCSO Act) at Puducherry.

2. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

3. Based on the complaint given by the de facto complainant/R2, a case in Crime No.56 of 2025 was registered on the file of the 1^st respondent/ Police against the petitioner and on completion of investigation, a final report was filed before the Sessions Court, FTC (POCSO Act) at Puducherry, for the offence under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and the same was taken on file in Spl.S.C.No.68 of 2025.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the case arises from a consensual relationship between the petitioner and the victim girl. He would submit that petitioner and the victim girl are relatives and that family members had arranged the marriage between them. However, even prior to the marriage, the petitioner and the victim girl had consensual sexual relationship, due to which, the victim girl became pregnant and she had gone to the hospital, and based on the information given by the Doctor, case was registered. He would submit that the victim girl has now attained majority and as on date, the petitioner and the victim girl are living together as husband and wife and their marriage has also been registered before the Sub-Registrar’s Office, at Puducherry on 13.11.2025. He would also submit that due to wedlock, they have got a male child and they are all living together happily. He would further submit that the petitioner and the victim girl have filed common affidavit for compromising the matter. Therefore, when the petitioner and the victim girl have compromised the matter, no useful purpose will be served by continuing the impugned proceedings; hence, the impugned proceedings may be quashed on the ground of compromise.

5. The petitioner and the de facto complainant/R2 appeared before this Court and they were identified by their respective counsel as well as by the Mr.J.Dhamodaran, SGHC 3048, Thavalakuppam Police Station, Puducherry.

6. On being enquired by this Court, the de facto complainant stated that she has amicably settled the dispute with the petitioner and she is not willing to pursue the criminal proceedings and therefore, seeks to quash the same.

7. Learned Public Prosecutor, Government of Puducherry, appearing on behalf of the first respondent submitted that though the parties have entered into a compromise while this case is pending, this Court, taking into account the seriousness of the offences, has to consider the issue as to whether offences of this nature can be quashed on the ground of compromise between parties.

8. The main issue that requires the consideration of this Court is as to whether this Court can quash the criminal proceedings involving non-

compoundable offences pending against the petitioner.

9. The Supreme Court, in a very recent judgment in K.

Kirubakaran vs. State of Tamil Nadu [2025 INSC 1272], in which the appellant was convicted for the offences under Sections 366 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, pursuant to the compromise entered into between the parties, by commencing the judgment with the quote “The fin