The Madras High Court expressed concern over alleged misuse of the 1098 child helpline system, observing that some Child Welfare Committee-linked officials allegedly pressured children into making false abuse allegations against fathers, while directing Tamil Nadu to frame safeguards ensuring fair recording of children’s statements.
The Madras High Court voiced serious concern over what it described as an “alarming trend” involving alleged misuse of the 1098 child helpline system. While granting bail to a father accused of sexually assaulting his daughter under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, the Court noted that there appear to be repeated instances in which children were allegedly pressured by personnel linked to the Child Welfare Committee (CWC) into making false allegations of sexual abuse against their fathers.
Justice K K Ramakrishnan directed the State government to create comprehensive guidelines to ensure that children’s statements are recorded in a fair and transparent manner, without any form of inducement, tutoring, or coercion intended to secure allegations against any person, including family members.
ALSO READ: Thane Rickshaw Driver Acquitted in POCSO Case Over Schoolgirl Modesty Allegation
The order noted,
“This Court painfully notices an alarming trend in certain cases involving allegations against fathers, wherein some officials attached to the Child Welfare Committee, shelter homes, or even police personnel appear to insist upon or induce the child victims to make allegations of sexual abuse against their fathers,”
The petitioner, who is the father of the minor girl, was booked under Section 7 read with Section 8 of the POCSO Act. The prosecution alleged that he was arrested on April 16, 2026, on charges that he sexually harassed his daughter, and that he was subsequently remanded to the district jail in Virudhunagar.
The High Court observed that, in several cases, children reportedly approached authorities to express distress connected to domestic disputes involving their parents. However, instead of addressing the underlying family issues, the Court said the system allegedly compelled children to make accusations of sexual abuse against members of their own families. The Court remarked that such practices not only traumatise children but also undermine the credibility and intent of child protection laws.
Referring to the facts of this case, the Court recorded that the minor girl had stated that her parents frequently quarrelled over her excessive use of a mobile phone.
ALSO READ: Delhi Court in POCSO Case: ‘No Amount of Compensation Can Undo Trauma’
The Court held that the child had contacted the 1098 helpline only to stop the disputes between her parents. Yet, according to her statement, the official managing the call allegedly insisted that she file a complaint accusing her father of subjecting her to “bad touch”.
The High Court further noted that the girl said she made the allegations against her father only due to the insistence and instigation of the concerned official.
The child also alleged that she was kept in a shelter home for five days, where officials attached to the Child Welfare Committee intimidated her into filing a complaint against her father, warning that action would otherwise be taken against her.
According to the Court, these accounts show that the girl was subjected to pressure and coercion to make allegations against her father.
Emphasising the purpose of the 1098 helpline, the Court explained that the service is meant to protect children in distress and to provide prompt assistance, counselling, and care. The Court stressed that the mechanism cannot be allowed to be misused in a way that subjects children to further emotional trauma or leads them to make false allegations.
The Court also observed that such allegations can have serious repercussions, including reputational harm, severe psychological distress, and lengthy legal proceedings for those accused.
Counsel for the petitioner, advocate K Asha, denied the allegations against her client and argued that the father had only reprimanded his daughter for excessive mobile phone usage. She submitted that disagreements often arose between the petitioner and his wife on that issue.
The defence further claimed that although the girl first contacted the 1098 helpline due to the family dispute, she later lodged what was described as a false complaint against her father under pressure from a CWC official.
ALSO READ: POCSO Case || Karnataka HC Grants Anticipatory Bail to EX-CM BS Yediyurappa
Opposing the bail plea, Additional Public Prosecutor S Ravi argued for the State that the girl’s statement had already been recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and had been presented before the High Court.
While disposing of the petition, the High Court directed the State government to frame suitable guidelines for all authorities dealing with children including 1098 helpline officials, Child Welfare Committees, and police personnel so that children’s statements are recorded fairly and transparently.
The Court reiterated that such statements must be taken without inducing, tutoring, or coercing children into making allegations against any individual, including their own family members.
In addition, the police were directed to conduct an enquiry against the Child Welfare Committee official who had handled the girl’s call. The District Collector of Virudhunagar was also instructed to pay compensation of Rs 1 lakh to the minor girl for the trauma allegedly caused by compelling her to make accusations against her father.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE