Madras High Court Dismisses a writ petition as there are no merits to entertain and says it’s a civil dispute.

Title: R. Geethalakshmi Vs. The Tamil Nadu State.

Decided On: September 13, 2023.

W.P.(MD)No.18184 of 2021 and W.M.P.(MD)No.15013 of 2021.

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice M. Nirmal Kumar.


The petitioner states that U. Senthilvel the fifth respondent is the tenant under the petitioner from the year 2016 and there was some dispute between them. On 22.08.2020, the fifth respondent along with his friends entered into the house of the petitioner, assaulted her husband and threatened him if he further demands any money, he would be done away. During the last week of October, 2020, the fifth respondent vacated the house, but locked the house and not handed over the key to the petitioner. Further, he failed to pay Rs.40,000/-, being the rental dues. Again, on 06.10.2020 the fifth respondent threatened and abused the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner lodged a complaint before the fourth respondent against the fifth respondent and his mother. The fifth respondent is related to some Police Personnels, who are supporting him and therefore, the fourth respondent has not taken any action against him. Hence, the petitioner sent a representation dated 27.11.2020 to the second respondent. Since the said representation was not considered, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing the present Writ Petition.

Legal Analysis and Decision:

The petitioner and 5th respondent on an oral agreement of rent and the 5th respondent gave Rs.2,00,000 in advance. The fifth respondent and his mother were residing in the first floor of the petitioner’s house. The fifth respondent’s sister’s daughter used to bring food to his mother. On one such occasion, the petitioner’s husband made sexual torture to his sister’s daughter and also made improper touch, for which, a complaint was lodged and a case in Crime No.8 of 2020 for the offences under Sections 7, 8, 9(m), 9(u) and 10 of the POCSO Act has been registered by the All Women Police Station, Manamadurai. On completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed against the petitioner’s husband in Spl.S.C.No.23 of 2020. The petitioner has been adopting all tactics, forcing the fifth respondent to ensure the withdrawal of the POCSO Act case registered against the petitioner’s husband and further informed that unless the POCSO Act case is withdrawn, the lease amount will not be repaid. He further submitted that on the complaint of the fifth respondent, the petitioner and her husband were called for enquiry. Initially, the petitioner herein appeared for enquiry before the third respondent and sought further time and thereafter, they did not appear for enquiry. It is a dispute between the landlord and tenant and hence, the Police getaway further action in this regard.   The petitioner neither participated in the enquiry nor preferred any proceedings before the Rent Control Court or any other civil forum, seeking appropriate remedy. On the other hand, she invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court, which is not permissible in law and prayed for dismissal of the Writ Petition.


The petitioner and the fifth respondent had some dispute with regard to tenancy over the property, which can be sorted out between them or through the Civil Court. The respondent Police have rightly kept away from the civil dispute. It is also to be seen that the petitioner’s husband involved in a case relating to POCSO Act and the victim girl is related to the fifth respondent. The Court held Since there are no merits to entertain the present Writ Petition the same is liable to be dismissed.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”


Click here to view Judgement



Delhi High Court Upholds Acquittal in POCSO Case with Inconsistent Testimony 

Case Title: State v. Sunil & Ors. 

Date of Decision: September 11, 2023 

Case Number: CRL.L.P. 680/2019 

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Hon’ble Ms. Justice Neena Bansal Krishna 


Factual Background 


The petitioner, the State, filed an appeal under Section 378 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) against the judgment dated August 7, 2019, issued by the trial court. The trial court had acquitted the respondents, Sunil and others, who were accused of various offenses under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), based on the benefit of doubt.  


The case revolved around the disappearance of a 12-year-old girl in September 2014, and the subsequent allegations of sexual assault against Sunil. The victim girl was found and reported sexual assault on October 1, 2014. Charges were framed against the accused, including Sunil, and the trial court acquitted them due to insufficient evidence.  


During the pendency of the appeal, one of the respondents, Saroj, passed away. The appeal against Saroj was abated, and the petition was considered only against Respondents No. 1 and 3. 


Legal Issues 


The main legal issues revolved around the prosecution’s ability to prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. The age of the victim was a critical element in the case, and inconsistencies in her statements were raised as a concern. The defense argued that the prosecution had failed to establish the accused’s guilt, while the prosecution contended that the victim’s testimony and DNA evidence were sufficient. 




The prosecution argued that the trial court’s judgment was flawed, and that the accused should not have been acquitted, given the evidence on record. They emphasized the consistency of the victim’s testimony and the DNA report as proof of the accused’s guilt. The defense, on the other hand, maintained that the trial court’s decision was justified and should not be overturned. 


Observation and Analysis 


The court noted several inconsistencies in the victim’s statements, particularly regarding her age. The victim had provided varying ages in different statements. Additionally, her behavior, such as not seeking help despite the opportunity, raised doubts about her testimony. While a DNA report established sexual contact between the accused and the victim, it did not prove force or non-consensual activity. 


Decision and Conclusion 


The High Court found that the trial court had made a reasonable decision based on the evidence presented. It concluded that the prosecution had failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, particularly due to the inconsistencies in the victim’s statements and the lack of conclusive evidence of force or non-consensual activity. Therefore, the petition seeking leave to appeal was dismissed, affirming the trial court’s acquittal of the accused. 


“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.” 


Written by – Ananya Chaudhary 

Click here to view judgment 




Delhi High Court Dismissed the petition filed for Quashing of FIR under IPC & POCSO act


Reserved on:29.05.2023

Pronounced on:05.07.2023

+ CRL.M.C. 7121/2022 & CRL.M.A. 8829/2023



The Delhi High Court Dismissed a petition for the quashing of FIR No. 162/2021, has been filed on behalf of the petitioner under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (the “Cr.P.C.”) for acts punishable by Sections 363/366A/376/505 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (the “IPC”) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual acts Act, 2012 (the “POCSO Act”).

Facts of the case

The present FIR was filed on 29.05.21 based out-off the statement of victim. Victim and her mother had shifted to wazirabad from daryaganj two months prior to the incident. She met the accused Mohd. Amaan Malik, a native of Daryaganj in Delhi, who was around 20 years old, while she was attending classes there while she lived there. They had become pals at the tutoring centre and had begun using mobile phones to communicate. The defendant had phoned her at Sabzi Mandi and driven her in his automobile to a guest home in Sarai Kale Khan. After that, he had provided her drink and engaged in sexual activity with her without her permission. The victim also claimed that the accused had started using her as leverage by threatening to post her inappropriate photos on social media. As a result, the victim claimed that the accused had repeatedly taken her to Sarai Kale Khan’s guest house where he had forcibly engaged in sexual activity with her.

She discovered she was pregnant on April 7, 2021, and told her mother about it. Her mother then phoned the accused and informed them of the pregnancy. Amaan, the suspect, then went to the victim’s home and threatened both the girl and her mother. At Turkman Gate on April 9, 2021, he married the victim by intimidating her mother. He then took the victim and her mother to sign the marriage licence. He then began sharing a rental home with the victim in Wazirabad, close to her mother’s home.

Accused threatened the woman, beat and molested her, and put pressure on her to get an abortion. She had requested that the accused take her to her marital house, and he had responded that he had merely conducted the marriage to get rid of her. The victim underwent a medical examination at LHMC Hospital as part of the inquiry, and a positive pregnancy test result was obtained. She had verified her statement, which was recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Her pregnancy was ended at LHMC Hospital and the foetus was saved after additional research. The suspect was detained on May 29, 2021. Blood samples from the victim, the victim’s foetus, and the accused were collected, and sent for DNA examination. The accused/petitioner was identified as the foetus’ biological father by DNA testing. It was discovered over the course of the inquiry that the victim was married. Her date of birth, which was discovered in her school records to be 12.05.2004, meant that she was 17 years old when she legally wed the accused.

Analysis of the court

Before arriving at the conclusion, the Delhi High court referred to the principles laid down in State of Haryana and Ors. v. Ch. Bhajan Lal and Ors.1992 SCC (Cri) 426 by the apex court, which is to be considered while quashing a FIRs and it also analysed the verdict of the apex court in the case of Neeharika Infrastructure v. State of Maharashtra 2021 SCC OnLine 315, and culled out the relevant principles that govern the law on quashing of FIRs under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.

Based on the facts of the case the high court was of the opinion that on prima facie terms this was a case of sexual assault which had taken place in 2021 and due to societal stigma and pressure the victim was forced to marry the accused which got established from the date mentioned in Nikahnama, It was undisputed that the victim was a minor throughout this entire time. The Nikahnama dated 09.04.2021 further demonstrates that, considerably later than the alleged sexual assault of the victim, the victim was still a juvenile and had not yet reached the age of majority.

The Court also mentioned the controversy around the age of marriage in muslim personal law and applicability of POCSO act, it cited several judgements from various high courts as, In Aleem Pasha v. State of Karnataka 2022 SCC OnLine Kar 1588, the Hon. Karnataka High Court noted that Muslim personal law will be superseded by the POCSO Act, a unique piece of legislation designed to protect minors from sexual assaults. Earlier, in Rahul v. State of Karnataka 2021 SCC OnLine Kar 12728, the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court made a similar observation. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court recently ruled in Khaledur Rahman v. State of Kerala & Anr. 2022 SCC OnLine Ker 5833 that marriages between Muslims under personal law are not excluded from the POCSO Act’s purview and that if one of the parties to the marriage is a minor, offences under the Act still apply regardless of whether the marriage is valid or not. The Court, while referring to Section 42-A of the POCSO Act observed that the POCSO Act will prevail over personal laws and customary laws.

While on the other hand the delhi high court also took of  the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court held in the case of Gulam Deen v. State of Punjab 2022 SCC OnLine P&H 1485 that a Muslim girl beyond the age of 15 is competent to engage into marriage and that Muslim personal law governs a Muslim girl’s marriage. The National Commission for the Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) filed Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 26834/2022 in opposition to the aforementioned ruling, and the Hon’ble Apex Court decided to consider the issue of whether a young Muslim girl can marry after reaching puberty. The Hon. Punjab and Haryana High Court in Javed v. State of Haryana, CRWP-7426-2022(O&M), it was determined that Muslim women who were 15 years old or older might wed someone of any race. In accordance with Section 12 of the 2006 Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, such a marriage would not be invalid due to the girl’s free will and agreement. However, the Hon’ble Apex Court ruled on 13.01.2023 in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 35376/2022 submitted by NCPCR that the ruling in the matter of Javed (above) should not be used as precedent in any subsequent cases. In a nutshell, as of now, the question of whether a female who reaches puberty and the age of majority after turning 15 is still considered a minor would be governed by the provisions of the POCSO Act/Child Marriage Restraint Act or not, is pending for consideration and adjudication before the hon’ble Apex Court. As a result, there are inconsistent rulings over whether the POCSO Act and the Child Marriage Restraint Act, or the personal law, will apply to a juvenile who is married under Muslim law. In any event, the claims of rape in this case are made before the couples’ marriage rather than after it, thus the court will not discuss the legitimacy of the marriage between the present petitioner and the victim.

In any case, in the current case, the minor victim expressly denies that any sexual relationships were established with her consent and describes the specifics of her initial sexual assault and subsequent sexual assaults under the threat of having her inappropriate photos made public. In these circumstances, the present case is not covered by the cases of Bhajan Lal (previous) or Neeharika Infrastructure (previous), and this Court cannot conclude from the merits of the case that the allegations against the petitioner are baseless or improbable or that the alleged offence could not have occurred.

However, this circumstance is frightening and serves as a harsh warning reminder. Occasionally, after a sexual attack, a troubling trend develops in which the accused marries the victim, In an apparent attempt to avoid being charged with a crime, they immediately desert the victim if the FIR is dismissed or bail is obtained.

This Court is not disposed to utilise its inherent authority under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for the purpose of quashing the disputed FIR in light of the overall facts and circumstances of the case. However, given that the charge arguments have not yet been heard, the issues brought before this Court can be raised before the competent Trial Court, where they will be resolved in accordance with the law. As a result, both the current petition and the awaiting application are dismissed.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written By – Shreyanshu Gupta

Click to view the judgement


₹14 lakh compensation to the minor victim girl orders Madras High Court; criticises Legal Service Authority for seeking dismissal of case.

Title:  T. Kaliammal         


         The State of Tamil nadu and Ors.      

Date of Decision: 26.06.2023.           


Citation: W.P.(MD) No.3252 of 2020 and W.M.P.(MD) No.2758 of 2020.

Even though a special court had ended all proceedings in the case when the accused passed away while the trial was still ongoing, the Madras High Court recently awarded compensation of 14 lakh to a minor, mentally challenged rape survivor. Justice PT Asha noted that the local special court had done the physically and mentally handicapped survivor and her family more disservice by dismissing the case.


The petitioner, who is the mother of a mentally challenged daughter, who has been ravaged and impregnated by a “wolf in sheep’s clothing”, old enough to be her father, has knocked at the doors of this Court seeking compensation for this wrong inflicted on her daughter. The family comes from indigent circumstances. The mother is an agricultural coolie and the father works as a Watchman in a private company. They are blessed with two children, a son aged about 18 years, who is undergoing his B.Com course at Mano Arts College in Thoothukudi District and a daughter, who is the victim. The victim is mentally as well as physically challenged. Since the husband is employed at Chennai, the mother and children are living alone. Being an agricultural coolie, the petitioner is forced to leave the daughter alone W.P.(MD) No.3252 of 2020 and go for her work. The accused, who is about 55 years of age and a neighbour, had taken advantage of the victim’s physical and mental disability and has committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault on her not once, but on several occasions. The condition of the victim is such that she was not even in a position to narrate the ordeal to her mother. It was only when she had become pregnant, that the mother came to know about the same and immediately, a complaint was lodged at All Women Police Station, Kadambur, Tuticorin, and an FIR too was registered under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as “the POCSO Act”). The petitioner has moved this Court for a mandamus to terminate the pregnancy, provide police protection to the petitioner and her family members and to provide reasonable fair and compensation to the victim.

Legal Analysis:

The judge stated that despite the prohibition under Section 362 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), the High Court has the authority to right this injustice. “This closure is yet another move that has done the victim significant injustice and, in some ways, demonstrates the indifference shown to the victim’s plight. The bar under Section 362 of the Code of Criminal Procedure would go into effect once the case was closed, making it impossible for the victim to seek additional compensation from the Court. Therefore, the petitioner contacted this Court appropriately. The Court stated that it had the authority to right this mistake. The Thootkudi District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) was also criticised by the court for how it handled its efforts to have the lawsuit dismissed.

The mother of a the victim girl who was discovered to have been regularly raped and impregnated by their 55-year-old neighbour had petitioned the court for just compensation. The case was already concluded by the special court since the defendant passed away while the trial was ongoing. The victim’s pregnancy was ended per the High Court’s directives, and she was given an interim settlement of Rs. 1 lakh. The District Legal Services Authority indicated in a counter-affidavit that the High Court’s request for compensation might be dismissed because the special court had concluded the case. The authority was criticised by the High Court for its callous and insensitive behaviour. “The fifth respondent has washed its hands of the issue and prays that the writ petition be dismissed instead of helping the Court attempt to rehabilitate and recompense the victim, who is a mentally and physically handicapped girl. It’s best to say as little as possible about the counter, said Justice Asha. The Court further determined that the victim was qualified to receive the maximum amount of compensation that may be paid under the various compensation plans. The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act) established the Tamil Nadu Child Victim Compensation Fund, and the court ordered the Thootkudi District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) to pay the victim’s compensation amount from that fund.


This Hon’ble Court by exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India directs that a compensation of a sum of Rs.14,00,000/- (Rupees Fourteen Lakhs only) be paid to the victim. This sum shall be deposited in an interest-bearing account with the mother as the guardian. The mother shall be permitted to withdraw interest every month. The said sum shall be utilised only for the up keep and the rehabilitation of the victim. The District Child Protection Officer shall visit the home of the Victim once in three months and submit a report to the District Legal Services Authority, Thoothukudi. The District Legal Services Authority shall ensure compliance of the above. In case, the report would state that the amounts are not being used for the welfare of the victim, then an application shall be made to this Court for modifying the orders by the District Child Protection Officer. In case, the mother requires substantial amount for the benefit of the victim, she can make an application to this Court for appropriate order. The amount of Rs. 14,00,000/- shall be paid from and out of the Tamil Nadu Child Victim Compensation Fund by the fifth respondent within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and report compliance to this Court.


This is a tragic case in which the accused aggravated penetrative sexual assault against the victim, a minor with mental disabilities, not just once, but multiple times. Unfortunately, he had already passed away before he could get any legal penalty. The Special Court closed the matter as charge abated without complying with Section 33(8) of the POCSO Act and Rules 7(1) and 7(2), The judge also directed the DLSA to ensure that the money was used only for the victim’s rehabilitation.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”


Click here to view Judgement


The POCSO case against man dismissed by Rajasthan High Court because victim claims she was not abducted forcibly

TITLE: Ankit Jatav v. State Of Rajasthan & Anr.

Decided on: 31/05/2023



Facts of the case:

Prayer is for quashing of FIR No.129/2021 registered with Police Station Maangrol, Baran for offence under Section 363 of IPC, however cognizance has been taken under Sections 366, 376, 376(2)(n) and Section 5(1)(j)(ii) and Section 6 of The POCSO Act. According to FIR, the minor girl of the informant left house on 11.04.2021 along with her friend, thereafter she did not return. It was suspected that she was induced to go. On 09.03.2022 the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. She stated that she was in love with the petitioner and she left the house along with the petitioner to marry. Thereafter, they married in a temple and thereafter with her consent physical relation between the two was established.

Argument from the Petitioner side:

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and the victim were blessed with a child also. In identical facts and circumstances of the case, to protect the matrimonial life, a bench of this Court quashed the FIR to prevent abuse of the process of law.


Considering, the fact that the victim had never alleged that she was forcefully kidnapped. No physical relation was with the petitioner when she was a minor. The two have already married and are having a child. In the circumstance, continuance of criminal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law. Hence, aforesaid FIR and the entire criminal proceedings arising out of the said FIR stands hereby quashed and the instant petition is accordingly allowed. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by: Mahima Saini

Click to view judgment


1 2