Suriyakannan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Alanganallur
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 20.11.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Crl.O.P.(MD). No.19125 of 2025 Suriyakannan, ... Petitioner Vs.
1. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Alanganallur Police Station, Madurai District.
In Cr.No.178/2022.
2. Muniraj
3. Xxxxxxxxx, ... Respondents PRAYER :-This petition is filed under 528 BNSS, to call for the records in Spl.S.C. No.37 of 2023 on the file of the District and Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Madurai and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Pandiyaraj, For Respondents : Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1 : Mr.S.Muthumalai Raja for R3
ORDER
This petition is filed challenging the impugned final report in Spl.S.C. No.37 of 2023 on the file of the District and Sessions Judge, 1/5
Mahila Court, Madurai, registered for the offences under Sections 366 and 344 IPC r/w. Sections 9, 5(L), 5(j) (ii) and 6(1) of POCSO Act, 2012.
2. The gist of the allegation is that the petitioner had sexual intercourse with the victim girl when she was a minor and thus committed the aforesaid offences.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the third respondent/victim would submit that the petitioner had a love affair with the victim, whose Date of Birth is 24.11.2004; that now she attained majority; and that the petitioner and the victim got married and consequently registered the marriage on 08.10.2025 under the Tamil Nadu Registration of Marriage Act, 2009. The marriage certificate has been produced before this Court.
4. The petitioner and the victim girl are present before this Court in person and identified by Mr.N.Gowsemohideenkhan, SSI, Alanganallur Police Station, Madurai District. The victim girl confirmed her marriage with the petitioner and expressed that she does not wish to pursue the 2/5
complaint and that now she is happily living with the petitioner. However, the compromise memo was not filed by the defacto complainant, who is the father of the victim girl, since he did not agree for the compromise. The compromise memo filed now has been signed by the victim girl and the petitioner, dated 24.10.2025, which is taken on record.
5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mahesh Mukund Patel Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 614 had held that in a case of this nature, where the victim, after attaining majority has married the accused and their marriage is also registered, no useful purpose would be served by continuing the prosecution and that it would cause undue hardship to all the parties concerned.
6. Considering the fact that the petitioner had married the victim girl, who has now attained majority and marriage has been registered and in view of the aforesaid observation made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mahesh Mukund's case cited supra, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by continuing the prosecution. 3/5
Accordingly, the impugned final report is quashed. The compromise memo dated 24.10.2025 shall form part and parcel of the order.
7. In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed. The petitioner shall pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as costs to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre attached to this Bench and file a photocopy of the receipt along with a memo reporting compliance in the Registry. 20.11.2025 Index: Yes/ No Speaking Order / Non-Speaking Order LS TO 1.The District and Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Madurai.
2.The Inspector of Police, Alanganallur Police Station, Madurai District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
4.The Officer in-charge, Mediation and Conciliation Centre Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
4/5
SUNDER MOHAN,J LS CRL OP(MD) No.19125 of 2025 20.11.2025 5/5