Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05.06.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR Crl.O.P. No. 10771 of 2026 Prathosh ..Petitioner Vs.
1. State rep. by its Inspector of Police, W-6, All Women Police Station, Ayanavaram, Chennai. (Crime No. 2 of 2022).
2. Nagapooshanam
3. Nithya ..Respondents
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS to call for records in Spl.S.C. No. 182 of 2022 on the file of Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Chennai and accept the compromise memo and quash the same. For Petitioner :: Mr.M. Shimiyon Edwin For Respondents :: Mr.R. Rajasekaran, Counsel for Govt. of Tamil Nadu (Crl.Side) for R1 Mr.K.S. Shyamsundar for R2 & R3
ORDER
The present criminal original petition is filed to call for records in Spl.S.C. No. 182 of 2022 on the file of Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Chennai and accept the compromise memo and quash the same.
2. The petitioner/accused in Spl.S.C. No. 182 of 2022 is facing trial for the offences under Sections 366 IPC, 67(B) of IT Act and Sections 7 r/w 8 & 11(iv) r/w 12 of POCSO Act, 2012.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the 2nd respondent/
de facto complainant and his wife are employees in SBI Life Insurance on contract basis and they have two daughters, namely, the 3 rd respondent herein/victim girl, studying in X standard in Nirmal Matriculation School, Ayanavaram and another studying in V standard in the very same school. The de facto complainant found that her elder daughter was often glued to her mobile phone and also found to be regularly chatting over phone. The de facto complainan\father of the victim girl had objected to the same. On 06.04.2022, he saw his daughter’s photographs along with another person in instagram and when he questioned, he came to know that in November,
2021, the 3rd respondent came in contact with the petitioner; they developed liking towards each other and they have been going to various places and taking photographs and one such photograph was posted in the instagram. Hence, the complaint was lodged by the 2 nd respondent on 08.04.2022 with the 1st respondent Police for the aforesaid offences. On completion of investigation, final report filed listing 17 witnesses and the same was taken cognizance in Spl.S.C. No. 182 of 2022 by the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Chennai.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the victim girl has now attained majority and as per her wish, the marriage was performed and reception was also held between the petitioner and the victim girl.
5. The 2nd respondent/de facto complainant, father of the
victim confirmed that now, his daughter has attained majority; both the petitioner and his daughter got married and they are living happily as husband and wife. The marriage photographs have been produced.
6. Today, the petitioner along with the victim girl and the
de facto complainant are present before this Court identified by their respective counsel as well as by Ms.V. Maria Suriya, WPC 63984, W-6, AWPS, Ayanavaram, Chennai.
7. Now, that the 3rd respondent/victim girl has attained
majority, which is confirmed by the 2nd respondent/father of the victim girl; the marriage between the victim girl and the petitioner has been performed with the consent of both families and the issue has been amicably settled, the 2nd and 3rd respondents do not want to pursue the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner and seek to quash the same. Affidavits and a Joint Compromise Memo have been filed.
8. The Joint Memo of compromise filed by the parties dated 24.03.2026 is scanned and reproduced below:
9. Learned Government Counsel (Crl.Side) appearing on
behalf of the first respondent submitted that though the parties 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.
10. It is seen that victim girl attained majority, married and
living happily with the petitioner. 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 petitioner 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. Hence, this Court is inclined to quash the proceedings pending against the petitioner in Spl.S.C. No. 182 of 2022 on the file of Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Chennai in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C./Section 528 BNSS.
M. NIRMAL KUMAR,J.
nv
11. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed
and the proceedings in Spl.S.C. No. 182 of 2022 on the file of Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Chennai is quashed as against the petitioner.
12. The affidavits and the Joint Memo of Compromise filed by the petitioner, the de facto complainant and the victim girl for compromising the offences shall form part of the records. 05.06.2026 nv
1. The Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Chennai.
2. Inspector of Police, W-6, All Women Police Station, Ayanavaram, Chennai.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Chennai. Crl.O.P. NO. 10771 of 2026