Criminal proceedings can be quashed if parties marry and agree to compromise.

O R D E R

The petitioner who is an accused in Spl.S.C.No.114 of 2025, facing trial for offences under Sections 5(1), 6 of the Protection of Child From Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Section 66E of Information Technology Act, 2000 and Sections 366 and 506(i) IPC before the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under the POCSO Act, Salem, has filed this Criminal Original Petition.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant was a minor girl studying in 11^th standard at Government Higher Secondary School, Salem. During that time, she became acquainted with the petitioner, and they developed a relationship. It is alleged that on 12.12.2023, the petitioner took the victim to his house and had sexual intercourse with her. It is further alleged that the accused took intimate photographs and recorded videos of the victim. Subsequently, when the victim resisted and refused to continue the relationship, the accused threatened her with dire consequences by using such materials. Based on the complaint lodged by the victim, a case in Crime No.4 of 2025 was registered by the respondent police for offences under Sections 5(1), 6 of the Protection of Child From Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Section 66E of Information Technology Act, 2000 and Sections 366 and 506(i) IPC. On completion of the investigation, the 1^st respondent Police filed a charge sheet before the trial Court, listing 16 witnesses and the relevant documents.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner and

2^nd respondent were married on 16.10.2025 and that their marriage was registered on 05.03.2026. He further submitted that they are leading a happy marital life. Hence, he prayed for quashing of the proceedings.

4. 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.

5. Today the petitioner and the 2^nd respondent appeared through video conferencing and their identities were confirmed by 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 and the 2^nd respondent have filed separate affidavits before this Court and have also filed a Joint Compromise Memo. The Apex Court in the case of “K.Dhandapani vs. State by the Inspector of Police reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 1056”, considered the subsequent events and observed that the Court cannot shut its eyes to the ground reality and disturb the happy family life of the petitioners as well as the victim. In view of the same, this Court finds that continuation of the proceedings will serve no purpose and it is only an abuse of process of law.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the proceedings in Spl.S.C.No.114 of 2025 on the file of the Special Court for the Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Salem is quashed against the petitioner.

17-04-2026 Neutral Citation: Yes/No AT To

1.The Special Court for the Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Salem.