CRL OP No. 16114 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 25-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR CRL OP No. 16114 of 2026 K.Sathyaseelan ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1.State rep.by Inspector of Police, Nagapattinam All women Police Station, Nagapattinam-611001. Cr.No.31 of 2023. 2.P.Sumitha ..Respondent(s) To call for the records in Spl.SC.No.10 of 2024 pending before the learned Sessions Judge, Special court under POCSO Act at Nagapattinam, and quash the same. For Petitioner(s): Mr.Kumar Pichandi For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Rajasekaran, G.A.(Crl. Side), for R1 ORDER The petitioner/accused, who is facing trial in Spl.SC.No.10 of 2024 before the learned Sessions Judge, Special court under POCSO Act at Nagapattinam, has filed this Criminal Original Petition. __________ Page1 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 16114 of 2026 2.The case of the prosecution is that the second respondent/de facto complainant, who was a minor, had love affair with the petitioner and they also had physical relationship. As a result, the second respondent/de facto complainant conceived and the same was confirmed at the Government Medical College and Hospital, Naagapattinam. Thereafter, based on complaint of the second respondent/de facto complainant, an FIR was registered. Upon completion of the investigation, a final report was filed and the same has been taken on file in Spl.SC.No.10 of 2024.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner and the victim girl were in a love relationship. Though the victim was a minor at the time of the occurrence, now she attained majority. It is further submitted that they are now living together as husband and wife and leading the matrimonial life happily and peacefully. Out of their wedlock, they are blessed with a girl child. Therefore the second respondent/de facto complainant is not inclined to proceed the criminal proceedings against the petitioner and prays for quashing of the criminal proceedings. In respect of the same, they filed a Joint Compromise Memo, which is scanned and reproduced hereunder: __________ Page2 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 16114 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 16114 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 16114 of 2026 __________ Page5 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 16114 of 2026 __________ Page6 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 16114 of 2026 4.The learned Govt. Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the first respondent Police submitted that during the relevant period of the offense, the victim was a minor and now she has attained majority and has given birth to a girl child. The petitioner and the victim are living together as husband and wife happily along with their child.

5. Heard the learned counsels appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record. 6. Today, the petitioners, the victim and their girl baby appeared before this Court, their identity is confirmed by the respondent Police 7. During interaction, the second respondent/victim informed that she attained majority, both the petitioner and the second respondent/victim are living as husband and wife and they are blessed with a girl baby. The second respondent/victim further informed that she is not inclined to proceed with the case and filed an affidavit to that effect along with Joint Compromise Memo. Though the offences under POCSO Act are serious and generally non-compoundable, this Court must consider the subsequent events and ground realities to preserve the welfare of the victim and her child. In similar matrix, the Apex Court in K.Dhandapani vs. State by the Inspector of Police reported __________ Page7 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 16114 of 2026

in 2022 SCC Online SC 1056, 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. 8.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the case in Spl.SC.No.10 of 2024 pending on the file of the Sessions Judge, Special court under POCSO Act at Nagapattinam, is hereby quashed. 9.The affidavit and the Joint Compromise Memo filed by the petitioner and the second respondent/victim for compromising the offences shall form part of the records. 25-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No PVS To 1.The Sessions Judge, Special court under POCSO Act at Nagapattinam 2.The Inspector of Police, Nagapattinam All women Police Station, Nagapattinam-611001. Cr.No.31 of 2023. 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. __________ Page8 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 16114 of 2026 M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J. PVS CRL OP No. 16114 of 2026 25-06-2026 __________ Page9 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

CRL OP No. 16114 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 25-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR CRL OP No. 16114 of 2026 K.Sathyaseelan ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1.State rep.by Inspector of Police, Nagapattinam All women Police Station, Nagapattinam-611001. Cr.No.31 of 2023. 2.P.Sumitha ..Respondent(s) To call for the records in Spl.SC.No.10 of 2024 pending before the learned Sessions Judge, Special court under POCSO Act at Nagapattinam, and quash the same. For Petitioner(s): Mr.Kumar Pichandi For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Rajasekaran, G.A.(Crl. Side), for R1 ORDER The petitioner/accused, who is facing trial in Spl.SC.No.10 of 2024 before the learned Sessions Judge, Special court under POCSO Act at Nagapattinam, has filed this Criminal Original Petition. __________ Page1 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 16114 of 2026 2.The case of the prosecution is that the second respondent/de facto complainant, who was a minor, had love affair with the petitioner and they also had physical relationship. As a result, the second respondent/de facto complainant conceived and the same was confirmed at the Government Medical College and Hospital, Naagapattinam. Thereafter, based on complaint of the second respondent/de facto complainant, an FIR was registered. Upon completion of the investigation, a final report was filed and the same has been taken on file in Spl.SC.No.10 of 2024.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner and the victim girl were in a love relationship. Though the victim was a minor at the time of the occurrence, now she attained majority. It is further submitted that they are now living together as husband and wife and leading the matrimonial life happily and peacefully. Out of their wedlock, they are blessed with a girl child. Therefore the second respondent/de facto complainant is not inclined to proceed the criminal proceedings against the petitioner and prays for quashing of the criminal proceedings. In respect of the same, they filed a Joint Compromise Memo, which is scanned and reproduced hereunder: __________ Page2 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 16114 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 16114 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 16114 of 2026 __________ Page5 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 16114 of 2026 __________ Page6 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 16114 of 2026 4.The learned Govt. Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the first respondent Police submitted that during the relevant period of the offense, the victim was a minor and now she has attained majority and has given birth to a girl child. The petitioner and the victim are living together as husband and wife happily along with their child.

5. Heard the learned counsels appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record. 6. Today, the petitioners, the victim and their girl baby appeared before this Court, their identity is confirmed by the respondent Police 7. During interaction, the second respondent/victim informed that she attained majority, both the petitioner and the second respondent/victim are living as husband and wife and they are blessed with a girl baby. The second respondent/victim further informed that she is not inclined to proceed with the case and filed an affidavit to that effect along with Joint Compromise Memo. Though the offences under POCSO Act are serious and generally non-compoundable, this Court must consider the subsequent events and ground realities to preserve the welfare of the victim and her child. In similar matrix, the Apex Court in K.Dhandapani vs. State by the Inspector of Police reported __________ Page7 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 16114 of 2026

in 2022 SCC Online SC 1056, 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. 8.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the case in Spl.SC.No.10 of 2024 pending on the file of the Sessions Judge, Special court under POCSO Act at Nagapattinam, is hereby quashed. 9.The affidavit and the Joint Compromise Memo filed by the petitioner and the second respondent/victim for compromising the offences shall form part of the records. 25-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No PVS To 1.The Sessions Judge, Special court under POCSO Act at Nagapattinam 2.The Inspector of Police, Nagapattinam All women Police Station, Nagapattinam-611001. Cr.No.31 of 2023. 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. __________ Page8 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 16114 of 2026 M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J. PVS CRL OP No. 16114 of 2026 25-06-2026 __________ Page9 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis