CRL OP(MD)/23375/2026 of Subin Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By In on 14 October 2026

ORDER

The present petition has been filed by the sole accused in Spl. S.C. No. 71 of 2022 on the file of Special Sessions Court for the Exclusive Trial of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act Cases, Kanyakumari District at Nagercoil, seeking to set aside the order of dismissal passed in Crl.M.P.No.21 of 2026 filed under Section 348 of BNSS., for the cross examination of PW1 to PW4.

2. Perusal of the records reveals that the petitioner has been charged with the offence under Sections 5(l), 6(l), 11(4) and 12 of the POCSO Act.

3. In this case, PW1 / victim, PW2 and PW3 / parents of the victim and PW4 / mahazar witness were chief examined on 29.12.2025. On the said date, they were not cross-examined. The present application has been filed on 19.01.2026 to recall PW1 to PW4 for the purpose of cross-examination. This application has been dismissed on the ground that the victim child cannot be repeatedly called before the Court to testify. Challenging the same, the present petition has been filed.

CRL OP(MD) No. 23375 of 2026

4. According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, it is a case of love affair, even as per the allegations in the FIR. When PW1 one was chief examined, she was a major and therefore, the rigour of section 33 (5) of POCSO Act would not get attracted. He further submits that the cross examination of PW1 to PW4 would be completed on the date on which they appear.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record.

6. As could be seen from the FIR, it is a case of love affair and when PW1 was chief examined, she has already attained majority. The application has been filed within a period of three weeks from the date of chief examination of PW1 to PW4. Today, the victim child is 20 years old.

7. This Court in a Judgment (Murugan Vs Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Nilakottai, Dindigul District) reported in 2022 LW Mad 116 has held that when the victim child had attained majority, the rigour of Section 33(5) of POCSO Act would not get attracted.

CRL OP(MD) No. 23375 of 2026

8. Considering the serious charges as against the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that one more opportunity should be granted to the petitioner to cross examine in PW1 to PW4.

9. In such view of the matter, this Court is inclined to pass the following order:

a) The impugned order in Crl.M.P. No. 21 of 2026 in Spl.S.C. No.71 of 2022, dated 23.02.2026 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Special Sessions Court for the Exclusive Trial of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act Cases, Kanyakumari District At Nagercoil is set aside and the petitioner shall be permitted to recall and cross examine PW1 to PW4;

b) the petitioner shall pay batta within a period of three days from the date of receipt of copy of this order;

c) the petitioner is directed to cross examine PW1 to PW4 on the date on which they appears;

d) the petitioner shall not be granted any further opportunity for cross examination of PW1 to PW4.

CRL OP(MD) No. 23375 of 2026

10. In the above terms, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 14-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No PNM To

1. The Sessions Judge, Special Sessions Court for the Exclusive Trial of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act Cases, Kanyakumari District At Nagercoil

2. The Inspector Of Police, Awps-Marthandam Kanyakumari District.

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

CRL OP(MD) No. 23375 of 2026 R.VIJAYAKUMAR J. PNM CRL OP(MD) No. 23375 of 2026 AND CRL MP(MD) NO. 22095 OF 2026 14-10-2026