Accused sought quashing of POCSO and IPC proceedings after amicable settlement; victim attained majority and filed affidavit of no objection. Court held allegations were minor overt acts and quashed proceedings despite non-compoundable nature.
S.C.No.750/2020 of Fast Track Special Court, Koyilandy, arising out of Crime No.12/2020, 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 A. BADHARUDEEN
TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JULY 2024 / 1ST SRAVANA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 677 OF 2023
CRIME NO.12/2020 OF Kuttiyadi Police Station, Kozhikode
SC NO.750 OF 2020 OF FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT,
KOYILANDY
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
YASIB
AGED 28 YEARS
S/O MOIDU, POKKITTATH MEETHAL
HOUSE,PERUVAYAL.P.O, CHOYIMODOM,
KUTTIADY,KOZHIKODE, PIN – 673008.
BY ADV U.P.BALAKRISHNAN
RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1THE STATE OF KERALA
REP.BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KUTTIADI POLICE
STATION, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT
OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM-682031, PIN - 682031
2 XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI M P PRASANTH
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 09.07.2024, THE COURT ON 23.07.2024 PASSED
THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC No.677 0f 2023 2
A. BADHARUDEEN, J.
================================
Crl.M.C No.677 of 2023
================================ Dated this the 23 rd day of July, 2024
O R D E R
This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, by the accused in S.C.No.750/2020 on the files of Fast Track Special Court, Koyilandy, arising out of Crime No.12 of 2020 of Kuttiyadi Police Station, Kozhikode, seeking the following reliefs:
(i) Call for the records in Crime No.12/2020 of Kuttiady police station now pending as SC No.750/2020 on the files of the Fast Track Special Court (FISC) for Disposal of Rape Cases and Cases Registered Under POCSO Act, Koilandy and quash all the proceedings against the petitioner.
(ii) Grant such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper as on the facts and circumstances of the case.”
CRL.MC No.677 0f 2023 3
learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the relevant documents.
prosecution is that at about 8.30 a.m on 13.02.2019 the accused herein wrongfully restrained the minor victim while she was going to school and caught hold of her hand with intention to outrage her modesty, asking her, why not, she could love him and thereafter, he followed the victim. He also threatened the parents of the victim that he would pour petrol and burn the victim if the victim would not be given in marriage to him. That apart, the photographs of the victim was taken and the same were published through social media. This is the base on which the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 341, 354A, 354D and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 12 read with Section 11(iv) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
CRL.MC No.677 0f 2023 4
false. According to him, now the victim attained majority and she filed an affidavit stating that the matter has been settled and she has no objection in quashing the proceedings. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the petitioner pressed for quashment of the proceedings.
concerned, the following decisions are to be ...
U.P & anr. , reported in [2017 KHC 6274 : AIR 2017 SC 1884 : 2017 (13) SCC 369], the Apex Court held in paragraph 39 that, inherent power given to the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is with the purpose and object of advancement of justice. In case solemn process of Court is sought to be abused by a person with some oblique motive, the Court has to thwart the attempt at the very threshold. The Court cannot permit a prosecution to go on if the case falls in one of the Categories as illustratively enumerated by this Court in [AIR 1960 SC 866],
CRL.MC No.677 0f 2023 5
State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal . Judicial process is a solemn proceeding which cannot be allowed to be converted into an instrument of operation or harassment. When there are material to indicate that a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive, the High Court will not hesitate in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceeding under Category 7 as enumerated in
State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (supra), which is to the following effect:
“(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly
attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the
accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.”
CRL.MC No.677 0f 2023 6
State of U.P. reported in [2023 KHC 7029 : 2023 KHC OnLine 7029 : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 613 : 2023 KLT OnLine 1751 : AIR 2023 SC 3709 : AIR OnLine 2023 SC 602 : 2023 CriLJ 3896], the Apex Court while considering the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C, in paragraph 12 held that, ‘ whenever an accused comes before the Court invoking either the inherent powers under S.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure or extraordinary jurisdiction under Art.226 of the Constitution to get the FIR or the criminal proceedings quashed essentially on the ground that such proceedings are manifestly frivolous or vexatious or instituted with the ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance, then in such circumstances the Court owes a duty to look into the FIR with care and a little more closely. We say so because once the complainant decides to proceed against the accused with an ulterior motive for wreaking personal vengeance, etc., then he would ensure that the FIR/complaint is very well drafted with all the necessary pleadings. The complainant would ensure that
CRL.MC No.677 0f 2023 7
the averments made in the FIR/complaint are such that they disclose the necessary ingredients to constitute the alleged offence. Therefore, it will not be just enough for the Court to look into the averments made in the FIR/complaint alone for the purpose of ascertaining whether the necessary ingredients to constitute the alleged offence are disclosed or not. In frivolous or vexatious proceedings, the Court owes a duty to look into many other attending circumstances emerging from the record of the case over and above the averments and, if need be, with due care and circumspection try to read in between the lines. The Court while exercising its jurisdiction under S.482 of the Cr.P.C. or Art.226 of the Constitution need not restrict itself only to the stage of a case but is empowered to take into account the overall circumstances leading to the initiation / registration of the case as well as the materials collected in the course of investigation. Take for instance the case on hand. Multiple FIRs have been registered over a period
CRL.MC No.677 0f 2023 8
of time. It is in the background of such circumstances the registration of multiple FIRs assumes importance, thereby attracting the issue of wreaking vengeance out of private or personal grudge as alleged.’
another man and she is living happily. Since the overt acts are
CRL.MC No.677 0f 2023 9
much less and the same are confined to the request for love and minor overt acts thereof, even though offences under the POCSO Act could not be quashed on settlement, the facts and circumstances of the case discussed would show that quashment can be granted in the interest of justice.
them in hazards of litigation. Therefore, in the interest of
CRL.MC No.677 0f 2023 10
justice, I am inclined to allow this petition.
In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case stands allowed. S.C.No.750/2020 on the files of Fast Track Special Court (FTSC) for Disposal of Rape Cases and Cases Registered under POCSO Act, Koilandy, arising out of Crime No.12/2020 of Kuttiyady Police Station, Kozhikode, stands quashed.
Sd/-
A. BADHARUDEEN, JUDGE
rtr/
CRL.MC No.677 0f 2023 11
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 677/2023
PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES
Annexure A1COPY OF THE PASSPORT OF THE PETITIONER
ISSUED ON 08.02.2016
Annexure A2ORDER ISSUED BY THE BUREAU OF
IMMIGRATION DATED 16.11.2023 TO THE
PETITIONER
Annexure A3THE COPY OF THE STAY ORDER IN CRL.MC
NO.677/2023 DATED 14.03.2023
Annexure 4THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER EXTENDING
THE STAY DATED 06.03.2024
Annexure 5TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
24.11.2022 OF THE REGIONAL PASSPORT
OFFICER, CALICUT
1 issue framed by the court
Whether proceedings in S.C.No.750/2020 for offences under IPC Sections 341, 354A, 354D, 506 and POCSO Sections 11(iv), 12 could be quashed under Section 482 CrPC given settlement and victim's affidavi
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Vineet Kumar & Ors. v. State of U.P & anr.Relied on¶6
[2017 KHC 6274 : AIR 2017 SC 1884 : 2017 (13) SCC 369] · Who else cites this
State of Haryana v. Bhajan LalRelied on¶6
[AIR 1960 SC 866] · Who else cites this
Mahmood Ali v. State of U.P.Relied on¶7
[2023 KHC 7029 : 2023 KHC OnLine 7029 : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 613 : 2023 KLT OnLine 1751 : AIR 2023 SC 3709 : AIR OnLine 2023 SC 602 : 2023 CriLJ 3896]
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Yasib
State of Kerala
A. Badharudeen
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court