Bringing SOP For Expediting Prosecution In Crimes Against Women And Children: State Informs Madras High Court

Appearing before the bench of Chief Justice SA Dharmadhikari and Justice G Arul Murugan, Advocate General Vijay Narayan said that the government is also giving priority to upgrading the infrastructure, which would, in turn, help with speedy investigation and trial.

The AG also submitted that the State would establish more DNA testing laboratories in the cities across the State. The AG sought time to file a detailed report with respect to the steps taken by the State in this regard.

The bench was hearing 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.

It was alleged 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.

The petitioner 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.

When the matter came up for hearing today, the AG submitted that the charges had been framed in the case on June 17, and the trial was to commence on June 24.

The court, after hearing the AG, directed the State and High Court registry to file a detailed report on the functioning of POCSO courts in the State, existing infrastructure and the need for additional special courts in the State.

Case Title: XXX v Director General of Police and others

Case No: WP 20751 of 2026