Prince Tendulkar v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Meignanapuram
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 13.10.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Crl.O.P.(MD).No.17016 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.(MD).Nos.13826 & 13827 of 2025 Prince Tendulkar ... Petitioner/Sole Accused Vs.
1. State of Tamil Nadu through The Inspector of Police, Meignanpuram, Thoothukudi, Thoothukudi District.
(Crime No.16/2024) ... Respondent No.1/Complainant 2.XXXX ... Respondent No.2/Defacto Complainant 3.XXXX ... Respondent No.3/Victim Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to call for the records in Spl.S.C.No.118 of 2024 pending on the file of the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Thoothukudi, Thoothukudi District and quash the same against the petitioner/accused. For Petitioner : Mr.KA.Raamakrishnan For R-1 : Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram Additional Public Prosecutor 1/8
For R-2 : Mr.K.Kaleeswaran
ORDER
The petitioner seeks to quash the impugned final report in Spl.S.C. No.118 of 2024 on the file of the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Thoothukudi District for the offences under Section 294(b), 323 of IPC and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
2. The allegation in the final report is that the petitioner, while working as a Physical Education Teacher in the school, in which, the victim boys were studying, had beaten the first victim with sticks; that when the victim's brother, the second victim, questioned the same, the petitioner had also beaten the second victim.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the allegations even if accepted to be true would not constitute the aforesaid offences; that the petitioner as a Teacher had only reprimanded the children; that the allegations are false; and that in any case, the parties have now arrived at a compromise inasmuch as the father of the two victims had entered into a compromise; and that the victim boys themselves, who are studying in the same 2/8
Village, who are aged about 13 and 16 years respectively, do not wish to pursue the complaint.
4. The parties have filed a joint compromise memo dated 13.10.2025. The compromise memo entered into between the petitioner and the father of the victim boys reads as follows:
3/8
4/8
5/8
5. The victim boys and their father, namely, R.Murugan (Aadhaar No.8628 0810 3327) are present before this Court in person. They are identified by S.Gnanasekar, Sub Inspector of Police, Meignanapuram Police Station, Thoothukudi District. When this Court asked the victim boys about the compromise, they stated that they do not wish to pursue the complaint. Their father would also confirm the compromise.
6. In view of the same, considering the nature of the allegations and the relationship between the parties and the dispute being private in nature, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the impugned final report pending trial. Accordingly, the impugned final report in Spl.S.C.No.118 of 2024 on the file of the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Thoothukudi District is quashed and the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 13.10.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No Lm 6/8
To 1.The Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Thoothukudi District.
2.The Inspector of Police, Meignanpuram, Thoothukudi, Thoothukudi District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
7/8
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
Lm Crl.O.P(MD).No.17016 of 2025 13.10.2025 8/8