High Court may quash POCSO proceedings when parties enter into voluntary compromise and continuation serves no purpose.

O R D E R

The petitioner/accused, who is facing trial in Special S.C.No.4 of 2023 for offences under Sections 9(f) and 10 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, before the Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Cuddalore, has filed this Criminal Original Petition on the ground of compromise.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the victim girl, Neyyapriya, daughter of the defacto complainant, was studying in 12^th standard at Lakshmi Chordia Memorial Matriculation Higher Secondary School, Cuddalore, at the relevant point of time. The petitioner was working as a Chemistry Teacher in the same school. It is alleged that on 09.06.2022, while the victim was attending a special Tamil class, a student informed the Tamil teacher that the petitioner had asked the victim to come to the teachers’ staff room. When the victim went there, the petitioner, who was alone in the room, allegedly called her inside, held her hand and made an inappropriate remark.

2.2. Further, the victim, distressed by the incident, returned to her classroom crying and disclosed the occurrence to her mother only after reaching home. On the next day, i.e., 10.06.2022, the victim’s mother informed the defacto complainant, who after making preliminary enquiries with the school authorities, lodged a complaint, leading to the registration of an FIR in Crime No.441 of 2022. The investigation has now been completed and a charge sheet has been filed before the trial Court, listing 13 witnesses and the relevant documents.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that during the pendency of the proceedings, both parties held discussions and resolved the dispute. It is stated that the alleged occurrence, as narrated in the charge sheet, had not in fact taken place in the manner alleged and the victim, being young and emotionally sensitive at the relevant point of time, had misconstrued the situation.

3.1. It is also submitted that the 2^nd respondent being the father of the victim, now realised that the case arose out of a misunderstanding and has expressed his unwillingness to continue with the prosecution. Hence, he prays for quashing.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the 1^st respondent submitted that based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, a case was registered and upon completion of investigation, a charge sheet has been filed before the trial Court, listing 13 witnesses.

5. The case is at the stage of trial. By passage of time, the parties have decided to bury their hatchet and compromise the dispute amicably among themselves.

6. Today the petitioner and the 2^nd respondent appeared before this Court and their identities were confirmed by Mr.S.Santhosh Kumar, SSI, attached to the 1^st respondent Police Station. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves. The petitioner, the 2^nd respondent and the victim have filed separate affidavits before this Court and have also filed a Joint Compromise Memo, which is extracted hereunder:

“The Petitioner / Accused and the Respondent No.2 / De facto Complaint (hereinafter, "Parties") respectfully submit as follows:

1. It is submitted that the Petitioner was arrayed as an accused in Crime No. 441 of 2022 registered by the Thiruppapuliyur Police Station, Cuddalore District, for alleged offences under Sections 9(f) and 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter, "POCSO Act"), which culminated in Spl.