S.DIVYA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner facing trial in Special S.C.No.247 of 2025 for offence under Sec. 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Sec. 75 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 before the learned Special Judge, Special Court for exclusive trial of cases under POCSO Act, Chengalpet (trial Court), filed this Quash Petition.

(2.) Case of the prosecution is that the 2nd respondent, the mother of the victim lodged a complaint that her minor daughter of 13 years old was subjected to verbal threats and psychological intimidation by her own Aunt and her friend Guna. The petitioner and the said Guna continuously threatened the victim to expose and publicly shame the victim over some private conversation of a personal and sensitive nature related to sex, which the victim had in privacy with the petitioner. Due to the threat, the victim was put under severe mental stress and she had gone to depression and was taken for psychology treatment. The threat made by the petitioner and her friend Guna through phone and whatsapp involves private matters of the family members. To shame, humiliate and mental torture the victim, the petitioner indulged in such activities. The 2nd respondent had to isolate her daughter from these pressure, hence, she was put to a school in Madurai for change of environment and to protect her from the petitioner and Guna. On the complaint of the 2nd respondent, FIR registered in Crime No.7 of 2025 for offence under Sec. 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Sec. 75 of Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. During investigation, the 2nd respondent/mother of the victim, victim, victim 's father, victim 's Aunt, victim 's Uncle and relatives examined and their statements recorded. The mobile phone used by the victim and the petitioner collected and sent to forensic examination. Further, the school certificates of the victim collected and 164 Cr.P.C. statement of victim confirmed the sexual assault made by the petitioner. On conclusion of investigation, charge sheet filed before the trial Court listing 17 witnesses and documents.

(3.) Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner married the brother of the 2nd respondent's husband on 4/9/2016. Out of the wedlock, they have two children, namely, S.D.Rithwik Mano, born on 28/5/2017 and S.D.Sithwik Mano born on 10/5/2020. Thereafter, the petitioner's husband and his family members started demanding one-third share in the property of the petitioner's father and also insisted money be provided for their fishnet business and for the purchase of Apple Company. They further insisted that the petitioner's father's property should be divided and a share be given to the petitioner, instead of giving entire property to the petitioner's brother. When the petitioner resisted the demands, misunderstandings arose and she was abused and forced out of the matrimonial home. Unable to withstand the harassment and cruelty, the petitioner lodged complaint before the Adambakkam Police, and CSR No.180 of 2024 dtd. 31/3/2024 assigned. Thereafter, a case in Crime No.13 of 2024 registered on 4/12/2024 against the petitioner's estranged husband, including the 2nd respondent's husband. The case is now pending trial before the Additional Mahila Court, Alandur for the offences under Ss. 74, 77, 78 and 79 of BNS and Sec. 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Sec. 498A IPC. To counter the same, the petitioner's estranged husband filed H.M.O.P.No.422 of 2024 before the Family Court, Nagercoil seeking restitution of conjugal rights. The petitioner filed a domestic violence complaint in D.V.C.No.31 of 2024 on 10/4/2024 before the Additional Mahila Court, Alandur. She also filed O.P.No.409 of 2024 before the Subordinate Court, Alandur, on 17/4/2024 seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty, besides filing M.C.No.27 of 2024 before the Additional Mahila Court, Alandur, claiming maintenance. It is further submitted that in order to bring the petitioner to her knees and compel her to withdraw all the cases filed against her estranged husband and his family members, the 2nd respondent devised a plan and sent a complaint to the Child Welfare Committee on 30/5/2025 and also to the Joint Commissioner of Police, South Zone, Chennai which was forwarded to the Inspector of Police, W-32 All Women Police Station, Madipakkam, for immediate action. In the said complaint, the 2nd respondent projected herself as Personal Assistant to Hon'ble Mrs.Justice J.N.Nisha Banu and influenced the Police and other officials to foist false case against the petitioner. Owing to the use of the said designation, the 1st respondent police left with no other option but to file the charge sheet. Thus, from the above narration, it is clear that the present case is nothing but a counterblast to the legal proceedings initiated by the petitioner to defend herself seeking justice.