The State police on Thursday vehemently objected to a plea by two Dikshidars of Chidambaram Sabanayagar Temple, also known as Thillai Natarajar Temple, to quash a First Information Report (FIR) registered against them under the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act of 2006.
Appearing before Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan, Government Advocate (criminal side) K.M.D. Muhilan contended that the criminal case booked in 2022 could not be quashed just because the victim girl had now attained majority and was not interested in the criminal prosecution.
He said that the FIR was registered on the basis of a complaint lodged by the then Cuddalore district child welfare officer who had not made any request to the police to drop the prosecution. Since child marriages were recurring in Chidambaram, the police were keen on prosecution, he added.
When the judge wanted to know why the police had kept the FIR pending since 2022 and what purpose would it serve when the victim herself was not interested in pursuing the matter, Mr. Muhilan obtained time till March 17 to file a detailed counter affidavit to the quash petition.
In their joint petition, the two Dikshidars stated that they were close relatives. The first petitioner’s daughter and the second petitioner’s son had fallen in love with each other and therefore, the elders in the family had decided to get them married.
The victim girl was born on July 7, 2004 but her marriage was performed on June 3, 2022, just a month before she turned 18, without understanding the rigours of the 2006 Act as well as the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act of 2012 and by “assuming” that she had attained majority, they said.
Pointing out the victim had turned 20 now and the couple was living together happily, the quash petitioners said, “No purpose will be served by allowing the trial to continue since the victim and the family members will not support the case of the prosecution.”
They also said continuation of further proceedings would only cause oppression, frustration and prejudice to the parties involved in the matter. The petitioners relied upon a catena of decisions in which courts had quashed FIRs even with respect to non-compoundable offences.
Their counsel told Justice Ilanthiraiyan that he would ask the couple as well as their parents to be present in the court on March 17 so that the court could inquire with them directly to find out whether they were interested in prosecuting the matter or not.
Published – March 06, 2025 11:28 pm IST