No Bar To Direct Investigating Officer To Register POCSO Case: Madras High Court Dismisses Plea Of Tamil News Channel Allegedly Revealing Name Of Victim

The Madras High Court has dismissed the Criminal Revision Petition of “News Tamil 24x7”, a news channel which was accused of revealing the name of the family members of the victim and exposing her identity.

The Court observed that there is no bar to direct the Investigating Officer (IO) to register a case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) and to investigate the matter.

A Single Bench of Justice P. Velmurugan held, “As per criminal jurisprudence, the prosecution has to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and it is very difficult for the victim to substantiate the allegation. The Special Court is also empowered to take cognizance of the offence, upon a police report. On the abovesaid facts, this Court finds that there is no bar to direct the Investigating Officer to register the case and to investigate the matter. There is no illegality in the order passed by the learned Special Judge and no prejudice would be caused to the petitioner.”

The Bench said that the offences under the POCSO Act are cognizable and the police should register the case straight away and conduct investigation, without obtaining any order/permission or direction from the Court.

Advocate Suresh Babu appeared on behalf of the Petitioner while Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) S. Sugendran and Advocate N.S. Siva Kumar appeared on behalf of the Respondents.

Factual Background

As per the Complainant’s case, the Petitioner company had published videos through its YouTube Channel namely “News Tamil 24x7” and revealed the name of the family members of the POCSO victim and exposed the identity of the victim. The Complainant invoked the jurisdiction of the Court of Special Judge for Exclusive Trial of Offences under POCSO Act Cases, under Sections 31 and 33(9) of POCSO Act for penal action under Sections 23(2) and 23(3). Based on the Special Judge’s direction, the Police registered a case against the Petitioner for the offence under Section 23(4) of the POCSO Act. Being aggrieved by such an Order, the Petitioner was before the High Court.

Reasoning

The High Court in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, noted, “Considering the serious nature of the offence and the responsibility for the petitioner towards the society, this Court is not inclined to set aside the order passed by the Special Court and also to grant stay of investigation of the case registered against the petitioner.”

The Court further took note of the fact that the Complainant filed a Complaint by approaching the Special Court. It said that the Special Court has got jurisdiction to take cognizance of the Complaint and proceed further.

“The Special Judge feels that the investigation report will assist the Court to find out the truth. It is nothing wrong to direct the police to register the case under POCSO Act. It is very difficult to substantiate the case by the victim alone by filing the complaint before the Court and bring the witnesses to substantiate their complaint. Section 33 of POCSO Act empowers the Special Court to take cognizance of offence without the accused being committed to it for trial upon receiving the complaint on facts which constitute such offence”, it also observed.

The Court, therefore, directed the Investigating agency to complete the investigation and file a final report before the Special Court as early as possible, preferably within a period of two months. It also directed the Special Court to complete the trial within the stipulated time.

Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Criminal Revision Petition.

Cause Title- News Tamil 24x7 v. Shruthi Thilak & Ors. (Case Number: Crl.R.C.No. 2330 of 2024)

Click here to read/download the Judgment