Supreme Court Invokes Article 142 to Set Aside POCSO Conviction After Victim Marries Convict; Says Order Is Not a Precedent
In a significant decision highlighting the scope of its extraordinary constitutional powers, the Supreme Court has invoked Article 142 of the Constitution to set aside the conviction of a man under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) after taking note of exceptional developments that occurred after his conviction.
The Bench comprising Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar passed the order in Maruthupandi v. State Represented by the Inspector of Police & Another (Neutral Citation: 2026 INSC 774; NIYAMSKANOON Citation: NK-SC-2026-00001).
The case arose from a relationship between the appellant and the prosecutrix when she was below the age of eighteen. The Trial Court had convicted the appellant under Sections 5(l) and 6 of the POCSO Act, and the conviction was later affirmed by the High Court.
During the pendency of the appeal before the Supreme Court, the prosecutrix attained majority and voluntarily married the appellant. The Court was informed that the couple had been living together peacefully as husband and wife. The prosecutrix also expressed her desire to continue the marriage and requested that the criminal proceedings be brought to an end. It was further submitted that the appellant had deposited ₹10 lakh towards her future financial security.
Considering these subsequent developments, the Supreme Court exercised its powers under Article 142 to do “complete justice” and set aside the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant.
However, the Court made it clear that the relief was granted solely because of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. It categorically observed that the order should not be treated as a precedent and cannot be relied upon in future cases involving offences under the POCSO Act.
The judgment reiterates that Article 142 is an extraordinary constitutional power available exclusively to the Supreme Court and is exercised only in exceptional situations where the interests of complete justice so require. At the same time, the Court ensured that its decision would not dilute the legislative intent behind the POCSO Act or create a general principle permitting similar relief in other cases.
The ruling serves as another example of the Supreme Court balancing constitutional equity with statutory objectives while emphasizing that extraordinary powers under Article 142 cannot be invoked as a matter of routine.
Case Details
- Case: Maruthupandi v. State Represented by the Inspector of Police & Another
- Court: Supreme Court of India
- Bench: Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar
- Neutral Citation: 2026 INSC 774
- NIYAMSKANOON Citation: NK-SC-2026-00001
- Relevant Law: Article 142 of the Constitution of India; Sections 5(l) & 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012
Source
Supremes Court Judgment; publicly reported court proceedings.
© NIYAMSKANOON – From Layman to Lawman
