JUDGMENT : J.B. PARDIWALA, J. For the convenience of exposition, this judgment is divided into the following parts: INDEX A. FACTUAL MATRIX B. IMPUGNED ORDER C. SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES i. Submissions on behalf of the Appellants. ii. Submissions on behalf of the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR). iii. Submissions on behalf of the respondent no. 1/the Sole Accused iv. Submissions on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 & 3/the State. D. ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION E. ANALYSIS i. Relevant Statutory Scheme and Provisions. a. Legislative History and Scheme of the POCSO. b. Relevant Provisions of the IT Act ii. Scope of Section 15 of the POCSO and Section 67B of the IT Act. a. Contradictory Views of different High Courts on the subject b. Three distinct offences punishable under Section 15 of the POCSO. I. Concept of an Inchoate Crime – The ‘Actus Reus’ and ‘Mens Rea’ required under Section 15. II. Concept of ‘Possession’, ‘Constructive Possession’ and ‘Immediate Control’ under Section 15 of the POCSO. c. Pornographic Material must prima facie appear to involve a Child. d. Scope of Section 67B of the IT Act iii. Presumption of Culpable Mental State under Section 30 of the POCSO. a. Concept of Statutory Presumption and Principle of Foundational Facts b. Foundational Facts required under Section 15 of the POCSO. c. Whether the Presumption under Section 30 of the POCSO can be resorted to in a Quashing Proceeding? iv. Whether the case at hand was one fit for the High Court to quash? a. Plea of Ignorance of Law: Ignorance of Law viz-a-viz Incognizance of Law. v. Summary of our conclusion F. FEW MEANINGFUL SUGGESTIONS i. The Lingering Impact of Child Pornography on the Victimization & Abuse of Children a. Obligation to report under Section(s) 19 & 21 respectively of the POCSO and Role of the Society and all Stakeholders ii. Suggestions to the Union of India and to the courts. G. FINAL ORDER 1. Since the issues raised in both the captioned appeals are same and the challenge is also to a self-same judgment and order passed by the High Court those were taken up for hearing analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. 2. The present appeals arise out of the final judgment and order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras dated 11.01.2024 in Criminal Original Petition (Crl. 2. The present appeals arise out of the final judgment and order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras dated 11.01.2024 in Criminal Original Petition (Crl. O.P.) No. 37 of 2024 (“Impugned Order”) filed by the respondent no. 1 (accused) herein under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, the “Cr.P.C.”) by which the High Court allowed the petition and thereby quashed the chargesheet dated 19.09.2023 filed for the offences punishable under Section 67B of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (for short, the “IT Act”) and Section 15(1) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, the “POCSO”) arising out of the FIR No. 03 of 2020, P.S. Ambattur, Chennai. As a consequence, the criminal proceedings in Special Sessions Case No. 170 of 2023 stood terminated. 3. It may be necessary to clarify that the appellant no. 1 herein, ‘Just Rights for Children Alliance’ is a collation comprising of five different NGOs that work in unison against child trafficking, sexual exploitation and other allied causes. Whereas the appellant no. 2 is a child rights organization working towards protecting children from exploitation and one of the partner NGOs to the aforesaid collation. The appellants herein were not a party to the proceedings before the High Court. However, having regard to the serious issue of public importance involved in the matter they sought leave of this Court to challenge the impugned judgment of the High Court. The respondent nos. 2 & 3 are the State of Tamil Naidu and the Inspector of Police, All-Women’s Police Station Ambattur, Chennai, respectively. A. FACTUAL MATRIX 4. On 29.01.2020, the All-Women’s Police Station Ambattur, Chennai, Tamil Naidu i.e., the respondent no. 3 herein, received a letter from the Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police (Crime against women and children Branch) wherein it was mentioned that as per the Cyber Tipline Report of the National Crimes Record Bureau (NCRB), the respondent no. 1 herein is an active consumer of pornography and has allegedly downloaded pornographic material involving children in his mobile phone. 5. Accordingly, in view of the aforesaid letter an FIR was registered against the respondent no. 1 herein is an active consumer of pornography and has allegedly downloaded pornographic material involving children in his mobile phone. 5. Accordingly, in view of the aforesaid letter an FIR was registered against the respondent no. 1 herein on the very same day i.e., 29.01.2020 at the All- Women’s Police Station Amba