Factual Background

The petitioner was accused of committing sexual offences against the de facto complainant when she was a minor. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, who was a distant relative of the victim, had repeatedly subjected her to sexual harassment and sexual assault whenever she returned home from her hostel during vacations. It was further alleged that in May 2022, the petitioner attempted to sexually assault the victim and physically assaulted her when she resisted. The complaint also alleged that certain family members intimidated the victim and prevented her from disclosing the incidents to others.

Based on the complaint, the police registered an FIR for offences under Sections 3(a), 4, 5(n), 5(l), 6, 16 and 17 of the POCSO Act and Section 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. After investigation, a final report was filed before the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under the POCSO Act, Thoothukudi. The petitioner thereafter approached the High Court seeking quashing of the proceedings. He contended that the allegations were false and had been engineered by certain individuals due to existing family disputes. He further relied on the victim’s subsequent statement before the Magistrate, wherein she stated that the petitioner had not committed any sexual offence against her and that she had lodged the complaint under the influence of others.

Court’s Analysis

The Court observed that offences under the POCSO Act are undoubtedly serious and ordinarily should not be quashed at the threshold. However, it noted that the present case contained exceptional circumstances. A significant factor considered by the Court was the statement made by the victim before the Magistrate under Section 183(6)(a) BNSS, wherein she specifically stated that the petitioner had not committed any offence and that the complaint had been lodged at the instance of others.

The Court also took into consideration the counselling report prepared by child welfare professionals appointed during the proceedings. The report revealed that the victim came from an emotionally vulnerable background and was susceptible to external influence. During counselling, she reiterated that the complaint had been lodged under pressure from certain individuals and expressed her unwillingness to continue the criminal proceedings.

The Court found that despite the victim’s exculpatory statement, the investigating agency had proceeded with the prosecution without adequately addressing the inconsistencies in the case. Considering the overall circumstances, the Court concluded that the prosecution suffered from serious infirmities and that permitting it to continue would amount to an abuse of the process of law.

Order of the Court

The High Court allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings pending in Spl. S.C. No. 24 of 2026 before the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under the POCSO Act, Thoothukudi. The Court further directed the authorities to conduct a preliminary enquiry into the circumstances surrounding the complaint and to provide counselling, rehabilitation, and vocational support to the victim.

Key Takeaway

The High Court held that although allegations under the POCSO Act must be treated with utmost seriousness, criminal proceedings may be quashed where the materials on record, including the victim’s own statements and counselling assessment, demonstrate that the prosecution is fundamentally unreliable and continuation of the proceedings would amount to an abuse of process. The judgment also highlights the importance of safeguarding vulnerable victims from external influence and ensuring their long-term rehabilitation and welfare

Written by Adv. K. Sri Hamsa