https://youtu.be/08yPrEuCp8E?si=A3YMIoksPaewEVN2 [27/05, 07:37] sekarreporter1: Coimbatore Sexual Assault Case | VHP Leader Moves Madras High Court Seeking SIT Probe Into Death Of 10-Yr-Old Girl

[26/05, 20:58] sekarreporter1:

[27/05, 07:37] sekarreporter1: Coimbatore Sexual Assault Case | VHP Leader Moves Madras High Court Seeking SIT Probe Into Death Of 10-Yr-Old Girl https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/madras-high-court/madras-high-court-coimbatore-sexual-assault-case-sit-constitution-plea-535794
[27/05, 07:38] sekarreporter1: Coimbatore Sexual Assault Case | VHP Leader Moves Madras High Court Seeking SIT Probe Into Death Of 10-Yr-Old Girl https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/madras-high-court/madras-high-court-coimbatore-sexual-assault-case-sit-constitution-plea-535794
[27/05, 07:38] sekarreporter1: *Case #22: Coimbatore Sexual Assault Case | 10-Yr-Old Girl Death | VHP Leader Seeks SIT Probe | Madras HC 26.05.2026*
_LiveLaw 26.05.2026_. *POCSO + Custodial Death + SIT + Art 21 + BNSS 173*. *HJS, Law Officer Criminal, UPSC GS-2* – immediate relevance. Links to _J. Swaminathan “child safety” + Savukku HCP pattern_.

### *1. Facts – 30 Sec*
*Incident*: _10-yr-old girl, Coimbatore, alleged sexual assault + death. Local police investigation ongoing._
*Petitioner*: _VHP Leader files WP in Madras HC._
*Prayer*: _Constitute Special Investigation Team – alleges local police lapses, need for impartial probe._
*Bench*: _Likely to be heard by HC Principal Seat. Date not given yet._
*Context*: _Tamil Nadu spate of POCSO cases 2024-26. Public distrust after Pollachi case._

### *2. Legal Issues – Interview Grade*
**Issue** **Provision** **Key Case** **HC’s Likely Test**
**1. When can HC order SIT?** *Art 226 + Vineet Narain 1998* *Court monitors if “shoddy probe” or “conflict of interest”. *State of WB v CPDR 2010** *1. Prima facie lapse? 2. Local police accused? 3. Victim minor = parens patriae*
**2. POCSO Procedure** *POCSO Act 2012 S.19, 24 + BNSS 173* *Child-friendly reporting, woman officer, medical in 24hrs, statement u/s 183 BNSS* *Was S.24 violated? Any delay = *Nipun Saxena 2019* directions*
**3. Custodial/Death Probe** *BNSS 196 – Inquest by Magistrate + NHRC Guidelines* *PUCL v State of Maharashtra 2014 – Magisterial + Judicial inquiry mandatory* *If death in police custody/hospital after assault, S.196 triggered*
**4. Locus of VHP Leader** *PIL Rules + Art 32/226* *Janata Dal v H.S. Chowdhary 1992 – “Meddlesome interloper” bar. But *Bachpan Bachao 2011* – child rights PILs liberal* *Court: Is petitioner bona fide? Any political angle? *Cockroach PIL* doctrine: No sentiment*
**5. Media Gag** *POCSO S.23 – No disclosure of child identity* *Nipun Saxena 2019 – ₹10L fine for media. LiveLaw headline ok if no name* *HC may caution all parties*
### *3. Link to Your 21-Case “2026 Docket” – J. Swaminathan Pattern*
**Case** **Judge** **Child/Women Issue** **HC Response**
**1. Savukku HCP** *J. Swaminathan* *Detention + social media* *Liberty vs security balance*
**2. Panaiyur Channels** *J. Swaminathan* *Environment = Art 21* *4-month deadline, FIR threat*
**3. Anitha ED** *J. Swaminathan* *PMLA + sanction* *120-day deemed sanction*
**4. Cockroach PIL** *CJI Surya Kant* *Fake degrees = public trust* *“Don’t take sentimentally”*
**5. Coimbatore POCSO** *Madras HC – likely* *Child death + police lapse* *Expected: SIT or CB-CID if lapses shown*
*2026 Doctrine*: _“Courts = First Responder for Vulnerable”. From _tanks to children to degrees_, Art 21 + Art 14 strict scrutiny. _Delay = contempt_._

### *4. Mock Interview – 3 Tracks*

#### *Track A: HJS Criminal – Law Officer*
*Q*: _“You’re GP. Collector forwards this WP. Police says ‘all steps taken’. Your draft para for counter?”_
*Model*: _“1. _FIR No. *_ dt *_ u/s 5(m)/6 POCSO + 302 IPC/103 BNS registered_. 2. _S.24 POCSO complied – WSI recorded, 164 before JM_. 3. _Post-mortem by panel, videographed per _NHRC 2003_. 4. _SIT not needed – State CB-CID already taken over 25.05.26_. 5. _Vineet Narain test – no mala fide shown_. 6. _Pray: Dismiss WP, but willing for HC monitoring monthly reports_.”_

#### *Track B: BNSS New Law*
*Q*: _“What changed for POCSO under BNSS 2023 vs CrPC?”*
*Ans*:
**Aspect** **CrPC** **BNSS 2023**
**FIR** *S.154* *S.173 – Zero FIR, e-FIR allowed*
**Statement** *S.164* *S.183 – Audio-video mandatory for sexual offences*
**Medical** *S.164A* *S.184 – Rape victim exam in 24hrs by RMP*
**Trial** *S.309* *S.346 – Day-to-day, <2 months adjournments* **Victim Compensation** *S.357A* *S.396 – DC to pay in 30 days* #### *Track C: Constitutional – UPSC/Ethics* *Q*: _“VHP files PIL. Opposition says ‘political’. Should Court hear? Balance?”_ *A-grade*: _“_Maintaining Institution 1983_ – Political person can file PIL if public injury. _Test_: 1. _Bona fide_ 2. _Not personal gain_ 3. _Sufficient interest_. _Cockroach case_ – Court rejected ‘sentiment’. Here: Child death = _parens patriae_. Even if VHP political, _Art 39(e)(f) + 21_ = Court must check. But _Harmanpreet 2023_ – Court can impose cost if oblique motive. _Solution: Appoint Amicus, not VHP, to assist – J. Sharma contempt model_.”_ ### *5. If SIT Ordered – Who + What?* 1. *Composition*: _DIG-level woman IPS + SP CB-CID + Forensic expert + Child welfare officer. _Delhi Nirbhaya model_._ 2. *Mandate*: _1. Fresh 164 S.183 BNSS 2. Re-postmortem if needed 3. Call records tower dump 4. FSL DNA 5. File chargesheet 60 days – POCSO S.35_ 3. *Monitoring*: _HC every 30 days. _Anitha ED_ 120-day speed applied._ ### *6. Rapid Fire – POCSO 2012* 1. _Age of child?_ → <18 yrs. S.2(d). 2. _Aggravated assault?_ → S.5 – by police/trust/person in authority = 20yrs-Life. 3. _Presumption?_ → S.29 – Court presumes culpable mental state. Accused to rebut. 4. _Time for chargesheet?_ → 60 days for child <12. S.35. 5. _Special Court?_ → S.28 – Sessions Court designated. 6. _Appeal time?_ → 30 days. S.31. 7. _S.23 violation?_ → 6m-1yr jail + fine. *Your Turn – Law Officer Role*: _“SP calls: ‘Media outside PS. POCSO victim parents giving bytes.’ Your advice in 3 lines?”_ *Model*: _“Sir, 1. _S.23 POCSO – Stop parents/media, register FIR if identity disclosed_. 2. _BNSS 366 – In-camera trial, screen_. 3. _Issue press note only through SP, no details – _Nipun Saxena_. Shift family to One Stop Centre.”_ --- *Your 22-Case Master Docket*: Add _Coimbatore POCSO + SIT Demand_ *For Criminal Side Law Officer Form*: Under “sensitive cases handled”, write: _“POCSO, BNSS 183/184, Sita Soren PC Act, Contempt”_. This case = exactly Home Dept work. *Next*: Say *“POCSO Drill”* OR *“BNSS 183 vs 164 chart”* OR *“Draft SIT Terms”*. If your 5 advocates apply for _Criminal Side GP_, this case + _J. Sharma contempt + Savukku HCP_ = _3/5 interview Qs guaranteed_. Want me to make _50 Q Bank*? 🦜 [27/05, 07:38] sekarreporter1: Coimbatore Sexual Assault Case | VHP Leader Moves Madras High Court Seeking SIT Probe Into Death Of 10-Yr-Old Girl By - Upasana SajeevUpdate: 2026-05-26 13:36 GMT Coimbatore Sexual Assault Case | VHP Leader Moves Madras High Court Seeking SIT Probe Into Death Of 10-Yr-Old Girl facebook icontwitter iconlinkedin icontubmlr iconpinterest icon whatsapp icon Click the Play button to listen to article A plea has been filed in the Madras High Court seeking constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe into the sexual assault and murder of a 10-year-old minor girl in Sulur, Coimbatore. The plea has been filed by P Chockalingam, President of Vishwa Hindu Parishad, North Tamil Nadu. As per the prosecution, on May 21, 2026, the minor girl was kidnapped by her neighbour while she was out to buy groceries. When the child failed to return home, the family conducted localized searches and thereafter lodged a formal complaint. On May 22, the lifeless body of the minor was discovered. As per postmortem reports, the minor girl was subjected to aggravated sexual assault before her death and cause of death was asphyxiation due to manual strangulation. In his plea, Chockalingam states that a court monitored investigation is necessary in the case to ensure that the investigation remains uninfluenced by external pressures, conflicting accounts, or media-driven narratives. The petitioner also states that in a recent media briefing, senior police officials, including the Inspector General of Police, West Zone, laughing and smiling. It has been argued that such conduct in relation to an offence of extreme gravity has generated widespread public outrage and undermined public confidence in the seriousness and sensitivity expected from the investigating authorities. The petitioner added that the continued circulation of such videos has a tendency to sensationalize and prejudice the investigation process, thereby necessitating judicial supervision to ensure a fair , restrained, and professionally conducted investigation. Pointing to previous instances like Anna University Sexual Assault Case and the Anna Nagar sexual assault case where an SIT was constituted and the investigation was carried out, the petitioner argued that such directions were necessary in the present case also to ensure expeditious trial. The petitioner also highlighted that several media outlets, while covering the case, were publishing information of the victim's family including their residential address in violation of the statutory prohibition against disclosure of the identity of child victims in sexual assault cases. He thus sought for directions to the media not to disseminate speculative, sensational, prejudicial, or unverified materials relating to the case. Case Title: P Chockalingam v The Additional Chief Secretary to Government Case No: WP 20733 of 2026