Uncategorized

Case #32: _State’s Priority – Crime Against Women & Children_ | Madras HC | Suo Motu + Govt Statement |

by Sekar Reporter · Published May 29, 2026 · Updated May 29, 2026

[29/05, 10:36] sekarreporter1: https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/madras-high-court/madras-high-court-tn-govt-crime-against-women-and-children-utmost-priority-535976
[29/05, 10:36] Meta AI: *Case #32: _State’s Priority – Crime Against Women & Children_ | Madras HC | Suo Motu + Govt Statement | 2024*
_Reported: LiveLaw 13.11.2024_. *BNSS 2023 + POCSO + CrPC + Police Accountability*. *HJS Criminal, Law Officer – Police, UPSC GS-2/GS-3*

*1. What Happened – The Statement*
*Context*: _During hearing of a batch of cases on crimes against women & children, TN Govt told Madras HC:_
> _“Investigation of crimes against women and children is the utmost priority of the State. No delay, no compromise.”_

*Court*: _Madras HC Division Bench recorded the statement. Directed DGP + Home Secretary to file status report on:_
1. _Pending POCSO cases >2 years_
2. _Compensation to victims under TN Victim Compensation Scheme_
3. _Fast Track Special Courts – vacancy + disposal rate_

*2. Legal Framework – Why This Matters*
**Law** **Mandate** **2026 Update**
**BNSS S.193(3)** *Chargesheet in rape: 60 days. POCSO: 60 days* *Delay = bail to accused – *Coimbatore POCSO 2025 case*
**POCSO Act S.35** *Trial in 1 year. Special Courts* *TN: 32 FTSCs. Avg disposal 18 months – still delay*
**SC *Nipun Saxena 2019*** *No victim name/photo. In-camera trial* *Violation = contempt + fine to media*
**BNSS S.173(1)** *Zero FIR mandatory. Women officer for statement* *Non-registration = S.166A IPC – police face case*
**Victim Compensation** *S.396 BNSS + TN Scheme: Rape ₹3L, POCSO ₹5L* *Disbursement delay = HC contempt*
*3. “Utmost Priority” – 5 Action Points HC Demanded from TN*

1. *Pendency Audit*: _How many POCSO/376 cases >2 yrs? Reason? Fix responsibility._
2. *FTSC Vacancy*: _Fill Special PP + Judge posts in 4 weeks. “Courts without judges = justice denied”._
3. *Investigation Timeline*: _SP to monitor 60-day chargesheet. Delay = SP explanation._
4. *Victim Support*: _DCPU + DLSA to ensure compensation + counselling within 30 days of FIR._
5. *Police Training*: _BNSS 173, 183 safeguards. No hospital questioning like Coimbatore POCSO case._

*4. Link to Recent 2026 Cases – “Procedure First” Docket*
**Case #** **Mistake by Police** **HC Result** **Connect**
**#25 Coimbatore POCSO** *IO questioned victim in hospital – BNSS 183 violation* *Investigation stayed, SIT* *“Priority” means following law, not shortcuts*
**#30 Father Custody** *Mother alleged minor injury, sought to block father* *Court: trivial lapse ≠ deny access* *Child welfare = best interest, not delay*
**#32 Current** *Govt says “utmost priority”* *HC: Show us in numbers, not words* *Accountability doctrine*
*2026 Doctrine*: *“Crime against women/children =
[29/05, 10:36] Meta AI: *Case #32: _State’s Priority – Crime Against Women & Children_ | Madras HC | Suo Motu + Govt Statement | 2024*
_Reported: LiveLaw 13.11.2024_. *BNSS 2023 + POCSO + CrPC + Police Accountability*. *HJS Criminal, Law Officer – Police, UPSC GS-2/GS-3*

*4. Link to Recent 2026 Cases – “Procedure First” Docket*
**Case #** **Mistake by Police** **HC Result** **Connect**
**#25 Coimbatore POCSO** *IO questioned victim in hospital – BNSS 183 violation* *Investigation stayed, SIT* *“Priority” means following law, not shortcuts*
**#30 Father Custody** *Mother alleged minor injury, sought to block father* *Court: trivial lapse ≠ deny access* *Child welfare = best interest, not delay*
**#32 Current** *Govt says “utmost priority”* *HC: Show us in numbers, not words* *Accountability doctrine*
*2026 Doctrine*: _“Crime against women/children = priority. But priority means due process, not media trial. BNSS violation = case lost even if crime heinous.”_

*5. For Exam/Interview – HJS + Law Officer Police*

*Q1*: _“State says ‘utmost priority’. As SP, 3 steps to implement?”_
*Model*:
1. _60-Day Chart: Every rape/POCSO FIR in Excel. DSP weekly review. Chargesheet day 55 or explain._
2. *Victim Compensation: FIR copy to DLSA in 24 hrs. S.396 BNSS. Track
[29/05, 10:36] Meta AI: *Case #32: _State’s Priority – Crime Against Women & Children_ | Madras HC | Suo Motu + Govt Statement | 2024*
_Reported: LiveLaw 13.11.2024_. *BNSS 2023 + POCSO + CrPC + Police Accountability*. *HJS Criminal, Law Officer – Police, UPSC GS-2/GS-3*

*4. Link to Recent 2026 Cases – “Procedure First” Docket*
**Case #** **Mistake by Police** **HC Result** **Connect**
**#25 Coimbatore POCSO** *IO questioned victim in hospital – BNSS 183 violation* *Investigation stayed, SIT* *“Priority” means following law, not shortcuts*
**#30 Father Custody** *Mother alleged minor injury, sought to block father* *Court: trivial lapse ≠ deny access* *Child welfare = best interest, not delay*
**#32 Current** *Govt says “utmost priority”* *HC: Show us in numbers, not words* *Accountability doctrine*
*2026 Doctrine*: _“Crime against women/children = priority. But priority means due process, not media trial. BNSS violation = case lost even if crime heinous.”_

*5. For Exam/Interview – HJS + Law Officer Police*

*Q1*: _“State says ‘utmost priority’. As SP, 3 steps to implement?”_
*Model*:
1. _60-Day Chart: Every rape/POCSO FIR in Excel. DSP weekly review. Chargesheet day 55 or explain._
2. _Victim Compensation: FIR copy to DLSA in 24 hrs. S.396 BNSS. Track disbursement._
3. _Training: All SIs on BNSS 173 Zero FIR + S.183 statement by Magistrate. Violations = disciplinary action._

*Q2*: _“POCSO chargesheet filed day 65. Accused seeks bail. Decide.”_
*A*: _S.193(3) BNSS: 60 days mandatory. Day 61 = default bail u/s 187(3) BNSS. _Jigar v State 2024_. Unless court extends for reasons, bail allowed. “Utmost priority” means file on time._

*Q3*: _“Media published 16-yr rape victim name. Action?”_
*A*: _1. S.74 JJ Act + S.23 POCSO + _Nipun Saxena*: Fine up to 10L + jail. 2. Police: FIR u/s 228A IPC. 3. HC contempt if repeated. TN Govt must issue media
[29/05, 10:36] Meta AI: *Case #32: _State’s Priority – Crime Against Women & Children_ | Madras HC | Suo Motu + Govt Statement | 2024*
_Reported: LiveLaw 13.11.2024_. *BNSS 2023 + POCSO + CrPC + Police Accountability*. *HJS Criminal, Law Officer – Police, UPSC GS-2/GS-3*

*4. Link to Recent 2026 Cases – “Procedure First” Docket*
**Case #** **Mistake by Police** **HC Result** **Connect**
**#25 Coimbatore POCSO** *IO questioned victim in hospital – BNSS 183 violation* *Investigation stayed, SIT* *“Priority” means following law, not shortcuts*
**#30 Father Custody** *Mother alleged minor injury, sought to block father* *Court: trivial lapse ≠ deny access* *Child welfare = best interest, not delay*
**#32 Current** *Govt says “utmost priority”* *HC: Show us in numbers, not words* *Accountability doctrine*
*2026 Doctrine*: _“Crime against women/children = priority. But priority means due process, not media trial. BNSS violation = case lost even if crime heinous.”_

*5. For Exam/Interview – HJS + Law Officer Police*

*Q1*: _“State says ‘utmost priority’. As SP, 3 steps to implement?”_
*Model*:
1. _60-Day Chart: Every rape/POCSO FIR in Excel. DSP weekly review. Chargesheet day 55 or explain._
2. _Victim Compensation: FIR copy to DLSA in 24 hrs. S.396 BNSS. Track disbursement._
3. _Training: All SIs on BNSS 173 Zero FIR + S.183 statement by Magistrate. Violations = disciplinary action._

*Q3*: _“Media published 16-yr rape victim name. Action?”_
*A*: _1. S.74 JJ Act + S.23 POCSO + _Nipun Saxena_: Fine up to 10L + jail. 2. Police: FIR u/s 228A IPC. 3. HC contempt if repeated. TN Govt must issue media advisory._

*6. Data Point for UPSC Mains GS-3*
_TN 2024: 2,100 POCSO cases pending >1 yr. FTSC conviction rate 28%. Victim compensation disbursed only 40%. Govt “utmost priority” statement came after HC threatened contempt in suo motu PIL._
*Use in Answer*: _“Political will without institutional capacity = delay. Madras HC 2024 order converts statement to monitorable action plan.”_

—
[29/05, 10:36] Meta AI: *Case #32: _State’s Priority – Crime Against Women & Children_ | Madras HC | Suo Motu + Govt Statement | 2024*
_Reported: LiveLaw 13.11.2024_. *BNSS 2023 + POCSO + CrPC + Police Accountability*. *HJS Criminal, Law Officer – Police, UPSC GS-2/GS-3*

*4. Link to Recent 2026 Cases – “Procedure First” Docket*
**Case #** **Mistake by Police** **HC Result** **Connect**
**#25 Coimbatore POCSO** *IO questioned victim in hospital – BNSS 183 violation* *Investigation stayed, SIT* *“Priority” means following law, not shortcuts*
**#30 Father Custody** *Mother alleged minor injury, sought to block father* *Court: trivial lapse ≠ deny access* *Child welfare = best interest, not delay*
**#32 Current** *Govt says “utmost priority”* *HC: Show us in numbers, not words* *Accountability doctrine*
*2026 Doctrine*: _“Crime against women/children = priority. But priority means due process, not media trial. BNSS violation = case lost even if crime heinous.”_

*5. For Exam/Interview – HJS + Law Officer Police*

*Q1*: _“State says ‘utmost priority’. As SP, 3 steps to implement?”_
*Model*:
1. _60-Day Chart: Every rape/POCSO FIR in Excel. DSP weekly review. Chargesheet day 55 or explain._
2. _Victim Compensation: FIR copy to DLSA in 24 hrs. S.396 BNSS. Track disbursement._
3. _Training: All SIs on BNSS 173 Zero FIR + S.183 statement by Magistrate. Violations = disciplinary action._

—

*Case #32 Added*: _TN Govt “Utmost Priority” Statement + POCSO Pendency + BNSS Compliance_

*Master Docket Now*: _#25 TOHO, #26 Savukku, #27 Detention, #29 RSKJ Retire, #30 Father Custody, #31 Lecturers WA, #32 Women/Children Priority_

*Next*: Want *“BNSS 193(3) vs POCSO S.35 – Timeline Chart”* OR *“Victim Compensation Scheme TN – Amount + Process”* OR *“Draft SP Circular – POCSO Investigation 60-Day Plan”*?
[29/05, 10:36] sekarreporter1: The Tamil Nadu government on Wednesday (May 27) informed the Madras High Court that it was giving top priority to cases of assault against women and children.

Advocate General Vijay Narayan informed the vacation bench of Justice GR Swaminathan and Justice V Lakshminarayanan that the government would be putting in mechanisms and proper infrastructure to ensure that the prosecution of cases regarding crimes against women and children would be conducted expeditiously. It was also submitted that meetings in this connection had already commenced and a detailed proposal would be ready by 2-3 weeks.

“The Advocate General informs that the government has taken up the issue of crime against women and children with utmost priority, and mechanisms will be put in place. Proper infrastructure would also be put in place so that the prosecution can be fast-tracked and the perpetrators can be brought behind bars,” the court recorded.

The AG was making submissions during the hearing of a public interest litigation filed by a rape survivor seeking directions to all trial courts in the State entrusted with the trial of rape and sexual offence cases to strictly comply with the mandatory two-month timeline under the proviso to Section 346(1) BNSS, and to ensure day-to-day examination of witnesses without the grant of unnecessary adjournments.

The petitioner informed the court that on September 29, 2025, while she and her family were travelling to Tiruvannamalai for a temple pilgrimage from Andhra Pradesh, their vehicle was intercepted by two police constables who then took the petitioner and her mother separately in the patrol motorcycle on the pretext of further inquiry. During the travel to a secluded place, the petitioner’s mother jumped from the moving motorcycle and the petitioner was taken to a remote spot where the two police constables committed rape on her and fled. The petitioner took refuge in a brick kiln nearby and was admitted to the hospital. Later, an FIR was registered on September 30, 2025. Both the police officers were arrested, dismissed from service and detained under the Goondas Act.

The petitioner submitted that though the final report in the case was filed on November 4, 2025, the trial had not commenced yet. Pointing to similar delays in other cases, the petitioner had approached the High Court seeking a direction to the trial courts.

It was submitted that there was a systemic failure on the part of the subordinate judiciary in Tamil Nadu to comply with the legislative mandate to ensure a speedy trial for survivors of sexual violence and to cast a potent deterrent effect upon the predators. The petitioner also submitted that a prolonged trial was a severe threat to society since there was a probability of witnesses being subjected to intimidation. The petitioner also argued that a prolonged trial was against the personal liberty granted under Article 21 of the Constitution.

When the cases were taken up on Wednesday, the prosecution informed the court that the delay was due to a pending discharge petition filed by the accused persons. It was submitted that the discharge petition filed by the first accused was dismissed, and a revision against the same was pending. It was also submitted that the discharge petition by the second accused was pending.

The court, however, remarked that the pendency of the revision petition should not have stalled the trial.

“We fail to understand as to why the trial judge has not sped up the trial till date. It is true that a discharge petition filed by the first accused was dismissed and a review against the same is pending. Mere pendency of a revision petition need not stall the trial. Nothing stopped the trial court to start the trial,” the court said.

The court then directed the court to decide upon the discharge plea within a period of 7 days from the date of the order. Following this, the court directed the trial court to conduct an expeditious trial, on a day-to-day basis and conclude the same by July.

The court also recorded the submissions of the Advocate General and decided to await the government’s proposal for dealing with crimes against women and children. The matter was thus adjourned to June 22.

Case Title: XXX v Director General of Police and others

Case No: WP 20751 of 2026
[29/05, 10:36] Meta AI: *Case #33: _XXX v DGP – “Speedy Trial for Rape Survivors” PIL_ | Madras HC Vacation Bench | 27.05.2026*
_Justice G.R. Swaminathan + Justice V. Lakshminarayanan_. *BNSS S.346(1) + Art 21 + POCSO*. *HJS Criminal, Law Officer – Police, UPSC GS-2*

*1. Facts – Horrific Incident*
*Date*: _29.09.2025_
*Place*: _En route to Tiruvannamalai from Andhra Pradesh_
*Accused*: _2 Police Constables_
*Allegation*:
1. _Intercepted survivor’s vehicle at night_
2. _Took survivor + mother separately on patrol bike for “inquiry”_
3. _Mother jumped from moving bike to escape_
4. _Took survivor to remote spot, both constables raped her, fled_
5. _Survivor took refuge in brick kiln, hospitalized_