Viswanathan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Awps-Kumbakonam

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 09/02/2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE L. VICTORIA GOWRI CRL OP(MD). No.2498 of 2026 AND CRL MP(MD). No.2768 of 2026 Viswanathan ... Petitioner/Accused Vs

1. State of Tamilnadu Rep by The Inspector of Police, Awps-Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District.

Crime No.37/2025.

... 1st Respondent/Complainant

2. R.Senthil Kumar ... 2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant PRAYER :- To call for the records pertaining to the impugned FIR in Crime No. 37/2025 dated 30.09.2025 on the file of the respondent police, All Women Police Station, Kumbakonam, for the offences U/s.7 and 8 of POCSO Act, 2021 and to quash the same.

For Petitioner :

Mr.B.Bhuvaneshvari for M/s.Ganesan Legist Law Firm, Advocate.

For Respondent :

M.Sakthi Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1 1/4

ORDER

This petition has been filed to quash the impugned FIR in Crime No.37 of 2025 dated 30.09.2025 on the file of the respondent police, All Women Police Station, Kumbakonam.

2. Considering the nature of the relief sought for, notice to the 3rd respondent is dispensed with.

3. The case of the prosecution is that on 08.09.2025, at about 07.00 p.m, the defacto complainant is the father of the victim girl, who is aged about 9 years old at the time of occurrence. When the victim girl was proceeding to make offerings into the hundi of the temple, the accused, who is working as priest in the temple, forcefully molested and touched her private parts. When the same was questioned by the defacto complainant and his wife, he replied lethargically in an irresponsible manner. Based on the complaint, First Information Report in Crime No.37 of 2025 was registered for the offence under Sections 7 & 8 of POCSO Act, 2012 against the petitioner. Hence, the petition.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is 2/4

aged about 73 years. He is working in the said temple for more than 40 years and he is the chief priest of the said temple. The allegation against the petitioner is foisted one. Earlier the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail by this Court, dated 14.11.2025, on the ground that he is not having proper eye vision and the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., is bald and it does not support the case of the prosecution. Hence, he prayed to allow this petition.

5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the first respondent police submitted that at the time of occurrence, the age of the victim girl is 9 years and the offence against the petitioner is serious in nature. Hence, he prayed for dismissal of this petition.

6. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

7. From the submissions made on either side, this Court does not find any merit in the petition to interfere with the pending investigation in POCSO case.

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 09.02.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No dss 3/4

L. VICTORIA GOWRI,J DSS TO

1. The Inspector of Police, Awps-Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District,

2. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.2498 of 2026 AND CRL MP(MD). No.2768 of 2026 Date : 09/02/2026 4/4