Court may quash POCSO proceedings based on subsequent developments affecting the marriage status and family stability of involved parties.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 04.03.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR and Crl.M.P.Nos.4153 & 4155 of 2026 Arulan Akash ... Petitioner Vs.

1.State rep. through The Inspector of Police, W-6, All Women Police Station, Ayyanavaram, Chennai – 12.

2.S.Bhavani

3.xxxxxx ... Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS to call for records in Spl.S.C.No.36 of 2022 before the Sessions Judge, Special Court Magalir Neethimanram at Allikulam for exclusive trial of POCSO Act Cases, Chennai on the file of the respondent Police and quash the same.

For Petitioners : Mr.M.K.Yukanth For R1 : Mr.Leronard Arul Joseph Selvam Additional Public Prosecutor ORDER The petitioner/accused facing trial in Spl.S.C.No.36 of 2022 before the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court Magalir Neethimanram at Allikulam for exclusive trial of POCSO Act Cases, Chennai, for the offence under Section 366 (A) IPC and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), filed this quash petition.

2.The prosecution case is that the defacto complainant Bhavani lodged a complaint stating that her husband is a flower vendor and she had two children, son and daughter. Her daughter is aged about 17 years, studying 12^th Standard in Seventh Day Matriculation School. During 2021, when she was studying 10^th standard, the petitioner who was residing in the opposite house had love affair with her daughter which was not approved and her daughter was warned. But the defacto complainant’s daughter continued her love relationship and hence, the defacto complainant agreed that after three years marriage can be performed and engagement was conducted. On 03.02.2022 the petitioner married the defacto complainant’s daughter and brought her home. Since the victim married the petitioner without her parents’ permission, the defacto complainant refused to entertain them and on 16.05.2022 the defacto complainant lodged a complaint, the officials from the Collector Office caused an enquiry and later case registered. During investigation, statement of witnesses LW1 to LW11 recorded, documents collected and on completion of investigation, charge sheet filed.

3.The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is a B.Sc graduate, now employed as Transport Manager. The petitioner and the defacto complainant’s daughter LW2 were in love relationship and both are neighbours residing in the opposite houses. The victim despite resistance from her parents continued her love relationship with the petitioner. Since the victim insisting for marriage with the petitioner, her parents agreed that marriage can be performed after three years and engagement conducted. After the engagement, the victim became embolden and forced the petitioner to marry her immediately, otherwise she would end her life. Left with no other option, the petitioner accompanied the victim to pacify her and on her compulsion, the petitioner agreed to marry the victim. Later when both the petitioner and the victim appeared, the victim’s parents mistook that marriage was performed and refused to allow her inside the house. Thereafter the petitioner and the victim were living with petitioner’s parents. In the meanwhile, some anonymous call sent to the Social Welfare Department, who caused enquiry and activated the Police. The Police enquired and forced the defacto complainant and the victim to lodge a complaint and case registered. He further submitted that the admitted position is that the petitioner and the victim both hail from the same area having similar social status and they had love affair for quite sometime. In fact engagement was also conducted which is not in dispute. Now the petitioner and the victim liv