‘Special circumstances’: Madras HC quashes POCSO minor marriage case, prioritizes welfare of young children

The Madras High Court had recently quashed cases filed under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act, 2012 (POCSO) and the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006. The court noted that the victim was the wife of the defendant and that he was married to her at the time. They were still underage at the time, but the couple now lives peacefully together.

Therefore, taking into account the welfare of the couple’s young children, the court found that the situation warranted leniency.

Based on hints from doctors at the government hospital who were taken to the government hospital for examination by the victim’s mother, the case has been referred to the police for investigation. Later, the police rushed to the hospital and took the victim’s statement. Accordingly, a case was registered against the victim’s husband, father and parents of the victim under the provisions of the POCSO Act and the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.

Seeking relief, the defendant approached the High Court. Their lawyer informed that the defendant husband and the victim girl (younger age) lived as husband and wife and had two minor children, aged approximately three and two years old respectively.

He argued that if the trial concluded and a verdict was reached, the victim’s husband and father, as well as the victim’s own parents, would be sentenced to varying lengths of jail terms, and if they appealed, a final decision would be delayed.

“By then, minor children aged three and two will be deprived of the love, affection and care of their fathers and grandparents. This is a very shocking situation,” he argued.

The court agreed with this argument and held that if the provisions of the POCSO Act and the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act are applied mechanically, through no fault of the minor children, they will be forced to “live a cruel life and face cruel consequences.” treat”. Social. So this is a special case. “

The High Court further emphasized that the involvement of both the husband’s father and the victim’s own parents in the crime was undeniable, adding an additional layer of complexity to the case. In view of this, it emphasizes that the most important consideration should be the physical and mental health of the minor children and their future.

The Court therefore concluded that, given the circumstances, a harsh application of the law must be avoided.

“This is an extraordinary situation. This cannot be applied as a general rule,” it said.

Justice Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup, therefore, allowed the petition and in exercise of extraordinary powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, quashed the case against the petitioner.