Allowed

Shahida v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC13 Feb 2024Crl.MC/330/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused sought quashing of charge sheet for offences under IPC Sections 377 and 506 and POCSO Sections 3(d) and 7 against a child victim, on the ground of settlement. The court found the settlement benefited the victim child, relied on Supreme Court precedents permitting such quashing, allowed the petition, and quashed the charge sheet.

What did the court decide?

Annexure A charge sheet in S.C.No.910/2023 and all further proceedings quashed.

Shahida Vs State of Kerala — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 24TH MAGHA, 1945
CRL.MC NO. 330 OF 2024

¶5

CRIME NO.23/2013 OF North Paravur Police Station, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT SC 910/2023 OF FAST TRACK SPECIAL
COURT, NORTH PARAVUR

¶6

PETITIONER

¶7

XXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
BY ADVS.
MANSOOR.B.H.
C.K.RAPHEEQUE
K.B.NIDHINKUMAR

¶8

RESPONDENTS

¶9

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM ., PIN - 682031

¶10

2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER NORTH PARAVOOR POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM ., PIN - 683513

¶11

3 XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX

¶12

OTHER PRESENT:

¶13

SR.PP-SRI.RENJIT GEORGE

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
13.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

¶16

Crl.M.C. No.330 of 2024

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

This Crl.M.C under Section 482 of Cr.P.C is filed by the accused in Crime No.23/2013 of North Parvoor Police Station, Ernakulam, registered under Sections 377 and 506 of IPC and Sections 3(d) and 7 of POCSO Act, for quashing Annexure A charge sheet and all further proceedings in S.C.No.910/2023 on the file of Fast Track Special Court, N.Paravoor,

¶19

The prosecution allegation is that on 11.12.2012, the petitioner sexually assaulted the victim boy, aged 12 years, by threatening him.

¶20

When the case is taken up for consideration, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the matter stands settled, and he produced Annexure B affidavit of the 3^rd respondent, endorsing the factum of settlement, and stating that, he has no intention to continue with the prosecution. He has no objection in quashing the proceedings in S.C.No.910/2023 pending against the petitioner before the Fast Track Special Court , N.Paravoor,

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor on instructions submitted that the matter has been settled, and he produced the signed statement of the victim boy and her mother, stating that as the matter is settled, they have no objection in quashing the proceedings in

¶22

¶23

Crl.M.C. No.330 of 2024

¶24

S.C.No.910/2023.

¶25

Since the matter stands settled, no purpose would be served by continuing the prosecution against the petitioner.

¶26

In the light of the principles laid down by the Apex Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another; [(2012) 10 SCC 303)] , and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Others;

¶27

[(2019) 5 SCC 688], this Court is of the view that the proceedings against the petitioner can be quashed on the basis of settlement as the settlement is for the benefit of the victim child also.

¶28

In the result, this Crl.MC is allowed, and Annexure A charge sheet in S.C.No.910/2023 on the file of Fast Track Special Court, N.Paravoor, stands quashed.

Sd/-

SOPHY THOMAS

JUDGE

smm

Shahida v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahida 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Prabha Kumar ( Died )

Abi @ Abin Sabu, Vs State of Kerala

Suhail Vs State of Kerala

Ameer, Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Ali Darbesh Khan Vs State of Kerala

Peer Muhammed, Vs State of Kerala