TITLE: Kajendra Vs. Superintendent of Police and others.
Decided On-: June 07, 2023
H.C.P.No.2182 of 2022
CORAM: Hon’ble Justice Mr. N.Anand Venkatesh and Sunder Mohan.
Facts:
X (D.O.B. 09.08.2005) and Y (D.O.B. 22.03.2005) fell in love with each other. There was some pressure on the side of X to get her married. Hence, X informed about this to Y and wanted to desperately get married to Y to pre-empt the parents of X from not getting X married elsewhere. On 03.12.2022, Y tied Thali around the neck of X in a temple as a symbol of marriage and they rented a house at Avadi and started living there. Over a period of time, X also got pregnant. Y was kept in POS for nearly 14 days and he was produced before the Juvenile Justice Board for bail hearing. Since the concerned Magistrate was on leave, the bail petition was not able to be taken up immediately. In the meantime, the court had passed an order on 16.06.2023 seeking for a report regarding this case. Ultimately on 21.06.2023, Y was released from the POS and was sent along with his parents. By then, Y had spent nearly 20 days in the POS.
Legal Analysis and Decision:
The division bench of Justice Anand Venkatesh and Justice Sundar Mohan – which was constituted to monitor the implementation of provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and the Juvenile Justice Act on the judicial side, had earlier sought a status report from the DGP regarding details of cases pending before the Courts/Juvenile Justice Board from 2010 to 2013, pertaining to victims and children in conflict with law. The court, on perusing this report, noted that out of a total of 1728 cases registered, 1274 cases are pending which could be divided into three heads-cases that are under investigation, cases where investigation has been completed but the final report has not been taken on file and cases pending trial. It then directed the DGP to ascertain the cases involving consensual relationships out of the 1274 cases. The court also directed the DGP to prepare a brief note on the facts of the case accompanied with the Section 164 CrPC statement of the victim to help the court to understand and take a decision. “While identifying those cases, a brief note on the facts of the case shall be prepared in order to enable this Court to understand and take a decision accordingly. The brief note shall also be accompanied with the 164 statement recorded from the victim.” the court said.
The court has also directed the police to come up with a standard operating procedure for conducting potency test using blood samples as the mechanism of collecting sperm samples from the offender was a thing of past.
Conclusion:
The Madras High Court has directed the State Police to ascertain the number of pending cases before the Courts/Juvenile Justice Boards involving consensual relationships of minor children. The court said that the same would allow it to deal with the cases and quash the proceedings, in appropriate cases, if found to be against the future and interest of the children or if found to be an abuse of the process of law.
“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.”
JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY JANGAM SHASHIDHAR.
