Allowed

Renjith v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Mar 2024Crl.MC/5205/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a special_crc.m.c., the court quashed criminal proceedings under POCSO and IPC against the petitioner. The petitioners wife (victim) stated that the matter was settled and they are now happily married. The court allowed the quashing to meet the ends of justice.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the final report in S.C.No.538 of 2022 and subsequent proceedings.

Renjith 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

THURSDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 17TH PHALGUNA, 1945

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 5205 OF 2023

¶6

CRIME NO.988/2021 OF Koodal Police Station, Pathanamthitta
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN SC NO.538 OF 2022 OF
SPECIAL COURT UNDER POCSO ACT, PATHANAMTHITTA

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

RENJITH

¶9

AGED 27 YEARS
KALLIPPARA THEKKECHARUVIL VEEDU, THIDI KALLIPPARA,
NIRATHUPARA P.O., KALANJOOR VILLAGE, KONNI TALUK,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 689694

¶10

BY ADVS.
MANU RAMACHANDRAN
M.KIRANLAL
R.RAJESH (VARKALA)
SAMEER M NAIR
GEETHU KRISHNAN
SAILAKSHMI MENON
ABHISHEK JOHNSON

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

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

¶13

2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KOODAL POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 689693

¶14

3 XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX

¶15

OTHER PRESENT:

¶16

SR.PP-SRI.VIPIN NARAYANAN

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

¶18

07.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

¶20

Crl.M.C. No.5205 of 2023

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

This Crl.M.C., under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., is at the instance of the sole accused in S.C.No.538 of 2022 on

¶23

the file of Additional District and Sessions Court-I, Pathanamthitta, for quashing Annexure A1 final report, and the proceedings pursuant there to.

¶24

The prosecution allegation is that the petitioner, who had a love affair with the defacto complainant, a 17 year old girl, sexually abused her and raped her on the promise of marriage. Thus he is alleged to have committed offences punishable under Section 376(2) (n) of IPC, Section 6(1) r/w. Section 5(1) and Section 5(j)(ii) of the Protection of Children from Sexual offences Act, 2012.

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the matter stands settled between himself and the 3^rd respondent defacto complainant, and they married each other on 10.02.2022, and now they are living

¶26

¶27

Crl.M.C. No.5205 of 2023

¶28

happily. So, pendency of the criminal prosecution will cast a shadow on their family life. Therefore, it is absolutely necessary to quash the final report in crime No.988 of 2021 of Koodal Police Station, Pathanamthitta, which is pending on the file of Additional District and Sessions Court-I, Pathanamthitta as S.C No.538 of 2022.

¶29

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the 3^rd respondent-defacto complainant and learned Public Prosecutor.

¶30

The petitioner produced Annexure A3 affidavit filed by the defacto complaint, which shows that her marriage with the petitioner was registered on 10.02.2022, and Annexure A2 is the copy of their marriage certificate.

¶31

Learned counsel for the 3^rd

¶32

respondent/defacto complainant submitted that since the petitioner married the defacto complainant and they are living happily as husband and wife, it is absolutely

¶33

¶34

Crl.M.C. No.5205 of 2023

¶35

necessary to quash the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner as S.C.No.538 of 2022..

¶36

Learned Public Prosecutor also, on instructions, submitted that the matter stands settled between the petitioner and the 3^rd respondent/defacto complainant, and they got married, and they are living together as husband and wife in a peaceful manner.

¶37

The alleged incident occurred, while the 2^nd respondent/defacto complainant was aged only 17. The offences alleged includes an offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC and also offenses under the POCSO Act. But, the defacto complainant herself has got a case, that she was in an affair with the petitioner, and they were engaged in sexual activities on the promise of marriage. Now, it seems, the promise is fulfilled, as he married her. The defacto complainant also wants to see that, the criminal prosecution against the petitioner is set aside, for them to lead a peaceful family life. So this Court is of the view that the matter has to be considered

¶38

¶39

Crl.M.C. No.5205 of 2023

¶40

favourably to meet the ends of justice, rather than the ends of law.

¶41

Learned counsel for the petitioner would rely on the decision Vishnu v. State of Kerala [2023 (4) KHC 1], in which criminal proceedings involving offences punishable under the POCSO Act, were quashed, on the basis of settlement arrived between the accused and the victim, who was a minor, at the time of occurrence. In the case on hand, though the victim was a minor at the time of occurrence, on her attaining majority, the petitioner married her. The settlement arrived is for the benefit of the defacto complainant also. So, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances, this Court is of the view that continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner will not do justice to the parties and rather it will be detrimental to their peaceful family life.

¶42

In the result, the Crl.M.C. stands allowed, quashing Annexure A1 final report in S.C.No.538 of 2022, on the

¶43

Crl.M.C. No.5205 of 2023

¶44

¶45

file of Additional District and Sessions Court-I,

Pathanamthitta,

Sd/-

SOPHY THOMAS

JUDGE

smm

Crl.M.C. No.5205 of 2023

¶52

¶53

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 5205/ 2023

¶54

`PETITIONER ANNE`	`XURES`
`Annexure-A1`	`A TRUE COPY OF`	`THE FINAL`	`REPO`	`RT IN`
	`CRIME NO.988/202` `STATION, PATHANAM` `IS NOW PENDING A`	`1 OF KOOD` `THITTA DIST` `S S.C. NO.5`	`AL` `RICT` `38/2`	`POLICE` `WHICH` `022 ON`
	`THE FILES OF` `(SPECIAL COURT),`	`ADDL. S` `PATHANAMTHI`	`ESSI` `TTA`	`ONS-I,`
`Annexure-A2`	`A TRUE COPY`	`OF THE`	`MA`	`RRIAGE`
	`CERTIFICATE`	`VIDE` `RE`	`GIST`	`RATION`
	`NO.93/2023 DATED`	`19.05.2023`	`ISS`	`UED BY`
	`THE LOCAL REGIST` `HARIPPAD.`	`RAR OF MUN`	`ICIP`	`ALITY,`
`Annexure-A3`	`A TRUE COPY OF`	`THE AFFID`	`AVIT`	`DATED`
	`14.06.2023 EXEC` `RESPONDENT/DEFACT`	`UTED BY` `O COMPLAINA`	`THE` `NT.`	`3RD`

Renjith v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Renjith 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

Muhammed Rafi.K Vs State of Kerala

Nidhin Chacko, Vs the State of Kerala

Linda Abhilash Vs State of Kerala

Balakrishnan M., Vs State of Kerala

Justine Vs Renju Justine

Muraleedharan Vs State of Kerala