In a significant ruling, the Kerala High Court has reaffirmed that cases registered under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act cannot be dismissed solely based on an affidavit from the survivor favoring withdrawal. The court emphasized that POCSO cases involve serious allegations concerning child safety and public interest, making them non-compoundable offenses that cannot be settled privately between the parties.
Background of the Case
The case in question involved Dr. P. V. Narayanan, a senior medical professional and resident of Kozhikode, who had approached the court seeking to quash the charges against him. The case was registered in 2016 based on a complaint from a Childline coordinator, alleging that Dr. Narayanan had inappropriately touched a Plus One (11th-grade) student during a medical examination. The girl had visited his clinic with complaints of fever and stomach pain.
According to the complaint, during the course of the examination, the doctor allegedly touched the student’s private parts, leading to accusations of sexual misconduct. Following this, the local police registered a case under the POCSO Act, which mandates stringent legal action against any form of sexual offense against minors.
Arguments Presented in Court
Dr. Narayanan, in his plea, argued that he was a senior medical professional with years of experience and that the allegations were false and misconstrued. He claimed that the medical examination was conducted in the presence of the girl’s neighbor and her daughter, following standard medical procedures. He further asserted that there was no inappropriate behavior and that the allegations were baseless.
Supporting his plea for case dismissal, the petitioner highlighted that the survivor had, in 2024, submitted an affidavit in court stating that she had no objections to withdrawing the case. This, he argued, was sufficient grounds for quashing the case as there was no longer a complaint from the alleged victim.
Court’s Ruling and Observations
However, Justice A. Badharudeen, while rejecting the plea, made it clear that cases under the POCSO Act cannot be dismissed merely on the basis of the survivor’s affidavit or willingness to withdraw the case. The court emphasized that POCSO cases are not just private disputes but involve larger public interest concerning child safety and protection from sexual offenses.
The judge pointed out that under POCSO, the state takes up the role of the prosecutor, ensuring that justice is served irrespective of any subsequent change in stance by the survivor. He noted that once a case has been registered under the Act, it must proceed through the judicial system, where evidence is examined, and justice is determined based on legal principles rather than private settlements.
Impact and Legal Precedence
This ruling reinforces the legal position that child sexual offense cases cannot be subject to out-of-court settlements or voluntary withdrawal by the survivor. The court’s decision aligns with past judgments that have emphasized the non-compoundable nature of POCSO cases, ensuring that perpetrators cannot escape legal scrutiny even if the survivor later changes their stance.
By upholding this principle, the High Court has sent a strong message that offenses under the POCSO Act will be treated with the utmost seriousness and that any attempt to dismiss such cases based on affidavits or out-of-court settlements will not be entertained.
This judgment is expected to have significant implications for similar cases, ensuring that legal safeguards for minors remain intact and that justice is not compromised through private negotiations.
