News Tamil 24×7 [Petitioner] Vs. Shruthi Thilak [Respondents]
Crl.R.C.No.2330 of 2024
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P .VELMURUGAN
The Madras High Court recently dismissed a Criminal Revision Petition filed by the Tamil news channel “News Tamil 24×7,” which was accused of revealing the identity of a POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act) victim and her family members. The Court ruled that there is no restriction on directing an Investigating Officer (IO) to register a POCSO case and conduct an investigation.
Justice P. Velmurugan, while delivering the judgment, emphasized that under criminal jurisprudence, the burden of proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt lies on the prosecution. Given the difficulty victims face in substantiating allegations, the Court found no illegality in the Special Judge’s order directing the police to register a case. The Court reiterated that POCSO Act offences are cognizable, meaning the police are required to register a case and investigate without needing prior approval from the Court.
The case arose after the Complainant alleged that the news channel, through its YouTube platform, had disclosed the names of the victim’s family members, thereby exposing the victim’s identity. The Complainant approached the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Offences under the POCSO Act, seeking action under Sections 31 and 33(9) of the Act. Based on the Special Judge’s direction, the police registered a case against the news channel under Section 23(4) of the POCSO Act.
Challenging this order, the Petitioner approached the Madras High Court. Advocate Suresh Babu represented the Petitioner, while Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) S. Sugendran and Advocate N.S. Siva Kumar appeared for the Respondents.
The High Court, after considering the facts, refused to interfere with the Special Court’s order, stating that given the seriousness of the offence, the Petitioner had a responsibility towards society. The Court acknowledged that the Special Court had jurisdiction to take cognizance of the case and initiate proceedings. It further noted that directing an investigation was justified, as victims often struggle to substantiate their complaints independently.
The judgment underscored that Section 33 of the POCSO Act empowers the Special Court to take cognizance of an offence without requiring the accused to be committed for trial. The Court observed that an investigation report would assist the Special Judge in determining the truth of the allegations.
The High Court directed the Investigating Officer to complete the probe and submit a final report before the Special Court within two months. Additionally, the Special Court was instructed to conclude the trial within the prescribed timeline.
Ultimately, the High Court dismissed the news channel’s petition, upholding the Special Judge’s order and affirming the necessity of a thorough investigation in cases involving the protection of children’s identities under the POCSO Act.
