PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to call for the records pending on the file of the Special Court for Exclusive trial of cases under POCSO Act, Tirupattur, Tirupattur District in Spl.S.C.No.149/2025 and quash the Criminal proceeding.

For Petitioner : Mr.E.Kannadasan

For R1 : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam, Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

The petitioners/accused, who are facing trial in Special S.C.No.149 of 2025 for offence under Sections 9 & 10 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 and Sections 5(l), 5(j)(ii) & 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 before the learned Special Judge, Special Court for exclusive trial of cases under POCSO Act, Tirupattur, has filed this Criminal Original Petition on the ground of compromise.

Case of the prosecution is that on receipt of information from the Government Hospital, Tirupathur, the 1st respondent Police had gone to the hospital and recorded the complaint of the 2nd respondent/victim. The complaint is that in the year 2024, as the 2nd respondent failed in 12th std, she discontinued her studies, and was idle at home. The petitioners 4 and 5 arranged marriage with the petitioner. On 12.07.2024, the marriage conducted at 06.30 in the morning in the presence of the family members. Thereafter, the 1st petitioner had physical relationship with the 2nd respondent, as a result of which, the 2nd respondent became pregnant. During the 10th month of pregnancy, the 2nd respondent was admitted in Tirupattur Government General Hospital where the Doctor examined the 2nd respondent and found that the 2nd respondent was a minor. The 1st respondent Police registered FIR in Crime No.352 of 2025 for offence under Sections 10 & 11 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 and Sections 5(l), 5(j)(ii) & 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. On conclusion of investigation, charge sheet filed before the trial Court listing LW1 to LW12 and documents and Special S.C.No.149 of 2025 assigned.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners 1 to 3 are husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law of the 2nd respondent and the petitioners 4 and 5 are parents of the 2nd respondent. The marriage between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent solemnised on 12.07.2024. He further submitted that at the time of the marriage, neither the 1st petitioner nor his parents/2nd & 3rd petitioners had knowledge that the 2nd respondent was a minor and the age of the 2nd respondent was not disclosed to the petitioners 1 to 3. Added to it, the marriage was performed with the consent and active participation of the 2nd respondent and her parents/4th & 5th petitioners. He further submitted that the case appears to be based solely on the later discovery of the 2nd respondent’s age, and not on any deliberate or intentional wrongdoing of the petitioners 1 to 3. The 2nd respondent’s parents/petitioners 4 & 5 being natural guardians, were primarily responsible for verifying and ensuring the age of their daughter before solemnizing the marriage. In the absence of any criminal intent, no case would be made out against the petitioners. He further submitted that now the 2nd respondent attained majority and gave birth to a female baby on 07.09.2025 and further the 2nd respondent and the petitioner are leading a happy married life. Hence, he prayed for quashing.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the 1st respondent Police submitted that in this case, during the relevant period, the victim was a minor and her date of birth is 10.03.2007. To confirm the same, the birth certificate of the 2nd respondent produced. The petitioners 2 to 5, who are the parents of the 1st petitioner and 2nd respondent, conducted marriage between them despite the 2nd respondent was a minor. He fairly submitted that now the 2nd respondent attained majority and the petitioner and the 2nd respon