The High Court of Kerala quashed the final report and proceedings under the POCSO Act and IPC against the accused. The court allowed the criminal miscellaneous petition based on a settlement and an affidavit stating the complaint arose from a mistake of fact.
The final report and further proceedings against the petitioner in S.C. No. 261 of 2017 were quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR
FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF AUGUST 2017/13TH SRAVANA, 1939
Crl.MC.No. 5067 of 2017 ()
SC 261/2017 of SPECIAL COURT UNDER POCSO ACT, MANJERI CRIME NO. 568/2016 OF KALPAKANCHERY POLICE STATION , MALAPPURAM
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
SIJU PAUL
AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.PAULOSE, THANIVEETTIL HOUSE, NORTH MAZHUVANNOOR P.O., AIRAPURAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.JOY C. PAUL
RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT COMPLAINANT REP BY FATHER:
12 YEARS (MINOR REP. BY HER FATHER), HUSSAIN, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.ATHU, CHANGANAKATTIL HOUSE, UMMERPADI, KALPAKANCHERY P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT676505.
R2 BY ADV. SRI.BINU PAUL
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI E C BINEESH
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04-082017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, J.
Crl.M.C. No.5067 of 2017
O R D E R
The petitioner is the accused in S.C. No.261 of 2017 on the files of the court below. The offences alleged are the offences under Section 354 I.P.C., Sections 7 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
Crl.M.C.5067/2017
-: 2 :-
was given to the police against the petitioner due to mistake of fact. It is further stated in the affidavit that his daughter has no further grievance against the petitioner. Considering the nature of allegations, I am of the view that quashing the said offences would be for the evident advantage of the minor. For the said reason, I am inclined to quash the final report and further proceedings against the petitioner in S.C. No.261 of 2017 on the files of the court below, in exercise of the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to meet the ends of justice and accordingly, I order so.
In the result, this Crl.M.C. stands allowed.
Sd/- B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, JUDGE
dl/4.8.2017
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the final report and further proceedings against the petitioner should be quashed upon settlement and affidavit stating mistake of fact.
Whether quashing the offences is for the evident advantage of the minor victim.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Siju Paul
State of Kerala
Shehadana C.K.
B. Sudheendra Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
