Allowed

Thahira v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Sept 2015Crl.MC/4335/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court quashed prosecution for statutory rape and related offences after finding the incident consensual and parties having amicably settled. The court held continuing the trial would defile the victim's present marriage.

What did the court decide?

The prosecution in S.C No.326 of 2014 and further proceedings in C.P. No.33 of 2014 against the 3rd accused were quashed under Section 482 CrPC.

Thahira Vs State of Kerala — Kerala HC (2015) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/17TH BHADRA, 1937

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 4335 of 2015 ()

¶6

CRIME NO. 863/2013 OF WADAKKANCHERRY POLICE STATION , PALAKKAD

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT AND VICTIM:

¶8

THAHIRA W/O.ABBAS, DAM RONEL, MUDAPPALLUR P.O PALAKKAD

¶9

APSANA, D/O.ABBAS DAM RONEL, MUDAPPALLUR P.O, PALAKKAD

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN

¶11

SRI.SAIJO HASSAN SRI.BENOJ C AUGUSTIN SRI.VISHNU BHUVANENDRAN

¶12

RESPONDENT(S):

¶13

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM

¶14

THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE VADAKKANCHERY POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶15

R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.REMA.R.

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-09-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

Crl.MC.No. 4335 of 2015 ()

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶20

ANNEXURE I: TRUE COPY OF THE FIR DATED 22/3/2013 ANNEXURE II: TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 30/7/2013.

¶21

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

/TRUE COPY/

P.S TO JUDGE

P.UBAID, J.

~~~~~~~~~~

Crl.M.C No.4335 of 2015 ~~~~~~~~~~~

¶28

Dated this the 8^th September, 2015

¶29

O R D E R

¶30

A prosecution involving the offences under Sections 212, 366(A), 373 (3) and 376 of I.P.C and also under Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act is sought to be quashed by the victim Apsana. Crime in this case was registered on the complaint of the victim's mother. She is the first petitioner herein and the 2^nd petitioner is the victim. The child was aged only 16 years at the time of the incident. The prosecution case is that the 1^st accused, with the assistance of the others, took the victim in a vehicle to different places and subjected her to sexual intercourse. Now the complainant and the victim seek orders quashing the prosecution on the ground that the parties have come to terms amicably, that the victim is now happy in matrimony with another person, and continuance of the prosecution in such a situation will embarrass her present matrimony. In fact, on a perusal of the proceeding, I find that this is a case of elopement, but the police made

¶31

Crl.M.C No.4335 of 2015

¶32

¶33

investigation and submitted final report finding a case of statutory rape, since the victim was aged only 16 years at the time of alleged incident. Everything that happened between the victim and the accused was in fact consensual, but the police registered a crime and submitted final report for the reason that the victim was aged below 18 years on the date of the alleged incident. Now everything stands settled and the victim is the happy wife of another person, and they have a child in the present wedlock. She apprehends that if she is exposed to a trial process in the given situation, it will cause problems to her and the family, and such a course may even defile their present happy matrimony.

¶34

As directed by the court, the petitioners appeared before and explained the circumstances in which they brought this petition to quash the prosecution. On interacting with them in open court, I find that the present application and the report of settlement are in fact in the best interest of the victim who wants to lead a very happy matrimony with her husband and with the child borne in the wedlock. It is affirmed by the victim and her mother, and also the husband of the victim that if the prosecution continues, and if the victim is summoned to court for a trial process, it will definitely cause

¶35

Crl.M.C No.4335 of 2015

¶36

¶37

embarrassment to them and may even create problems in their matrimony. I am well satisfied that the victim is now leading a very happy matrimony with her husband, who affirmed before me that decision for a settlement was taken in the best interest of the victim and her child. I find that in the above situation, continuance of the prosecution will cause harm and hardship to parties, and it will definitely defile the happy matrimony of the victim. In such a situation, it is appropriate that the prosecution be quashed.

¶38

In the result, this petition is allowed. The prosecution in S.C No.326 of 2014 of the Court of Session Palakkad now pending before the Additional Sessions Court, Palakkad and also the further proceedings in C.P. No.33 of 2014 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Alathur, which is a split up case against the 3^rd accused, will stand quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Sd/P.UBAID JUDGE

/True copy/

P.S to Judge

Thahira v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thahira v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Babu Vs State of Kerala

Samad Vs State of Kerala

Ananthakrishna Nayak Vs Vijaya.K

Rahmath Shafi Vs State of Kerala

Jasif M. Vs Muhammed Razal

Jaffer Mandyan Vs the State of Kerala