Rahul Ramachandran Vs State of Kerala

¶1

2025:KER:27404

¶2

Crl.M.C.No.5625/2020

¶3

-:1:-

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.GIRISH

¶7

TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 11TH CHAITHRA, 1947

¶8

CRL.MC NO. 5625 OF 2020

¶9

CRIME NO.824/2017 OF PERAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR

¶10

AGAINST THE ORDER IN CP NO.61 OF 2019 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
OF FIRST CLASS, KUNNAMKULAM

¶11

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶12

RAHUL RAMACHANDRAN,
AGED 29 YEARS,
SON OF RAMACHANDRAN, CHERUSALA HOUSE,
AVANOOR P.O., PERAMANGALAM,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, NOW AT BUILDING 13,
ZONE 54, STREET 754, DOHA, QATAR.

¶13

BY ADVS.K. RAMKUMAR (SR)

¶14

 T.RAMPRASAD UNNI
 SRI.S.M.PRASANTH
 SRI.G.RENJITH
 SMT.R.S.ASWINI SANKAR
 SRI.T.H.ARAVIND

¶15

RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:

¶16

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

¶17

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PERAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR-680545.

¶18

3 XXXX
XXXX
SMT. SEETHA S., SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
27.03.2025, THE COURT ON 01.04.2025 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

Crl.M.C.No.5625/2020

¶21

2025:KER:27404

¶22

-:2:-

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

The accused in C.P.No.61/2019 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kunnamkulam, has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to quash the proceedings against him in the said case. The allegation against the petitioner is that he committed the offence of criminal intimidation and

¶25

rape punishable under Sections 506 & 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

¶26

The prosecution case is that, on 11.04.2015, at about 2:00 p.m., the petitioner raped the de facto complainant in the bedroom in

¶27

the first floor of the house of the de facto complainant at Avanoor Village in Thrissur District, after threatening her that her naked photos which he had obtained from her, would be shown to her husband, if she did not surrender her body to him. The incident is said to have taken place at the time when the petitioner came on leave from his place of employment abroad. It is stated that the petitioner was a frequent visitor to the house of the de facto complainant as a friend of her husband before he left India in connection with his employment. While

¶28

the petitioner was in the Gulf country, he is said to have been keeping communications with the de facto complainant. During that time, the

¶29

Crl.M.C.No.5625/2020

¶30

2025:KER:27404

¶31

-:3:-

¶32

petitioner is said to have advanced money to the de facto complainant, without the knowledge of her husband, for meeting the expenses of a surgery for the de facto complainant. Thereafter, the petitioner is alleged to have been behaving in such a manner dominating the will of the de facto complainant.

¶33

In the present petition, the petitioner would contend that the charge levelled against him is apparently baseless and false, since he was working abroad on 11.04.2015, when he allegedly raped the de facto complainant at her residence in Thrissur.

¶34

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.

¶35

Having regard to the nature of the challenge raised by the petitioner that he was abroad at the time when the alleged incident took place at the residence of the de facto complainant in Thrissur on 11.04.2015, the Investigating Officer was directed vide order dated 07.12.2024 of this Court, to enquire into the question whether the petitioner was available in India on 11.04.2015 when the offence is said to have taken place. In compliance with the aforesaid direction, the Investigating Officer filed a report dated 15.03.2025, stating that as per the enquiries made with ICJS Portal by entering the passport details of

¶36

2025:KER:27404

¶37

Crl.M.C.No.5625/2020

¶38

-:4:-

¶39

the petitioner in the Immigration, Visa, and Foreigners Registration and Tracking Window, it was found that the petitioner had departed from Cochin Airport on 17.02.2014 and returned to India and arrived at Cochin Airport on 08.10.2015. It is further made clear in the aforesaid report that as per the data received from ICJS Portal, the petitioner was not present in India, when the offence was committed.

¶40

In the light of the above report of the Investigating Officer, it is clear that the charge levelled against the petitioner in the final report about the criminal intimidation and rape committed by him on 11.04.2015 at the residence of the de facto complainant at Thrissur, is apparently false and baseless. Therefore, the prayer in this petition to quash the proceedings against the petitioner, has to be allowed.

¶41

In the result, the petition stands allowed. The proceedings against the petitioner in C.P.No.61/2019 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kunnamkulam, consequent to the registration of Crime No.824/2017 of Peramangalam Police Station, are hereby quashed.

(sd/-)

G. GIRISH, JUDGE

DST

Crl.M.C.No.5625/2020

2025:KER:27404

¶47

-:5:-

¶48

APPENDIX

¶49

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶50

ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN C.P.61 OF 2019 ON
THE FILE OF THE JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST
CLASS, KUNNAMKULAM DATED 29.08.2019.
ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT
DATED 17.08.2017 IN CRIME NO.0824 OF 2017 ON
THE FILE OF THE PERAMANGALAM POLICE.
ANNEXURE C TRUE COPY OF STATEMENT DATED 18.08.2017 GIVEN
BY THE VICTIM.
ANNEXURE C(1) TRUE COPY OF STATEMENT DATED 18.08.2017 GIVEN
THE HUSBAND OF THE VICTIM.
ANNEXURE D TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 10.11.2020 IN
CRL.M.C.NO.8233 OF 2017.
ANNEXURE - E TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE COURT
BELOW IN C.P. NO. 61 OF 2019 ON THE FILE OF
THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE,
KUNNAMKULAM

Rahul Ramachandran v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Ramachandran v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anil Vs State of Kerala

Anees.a Vs Irem Irshad

Navas.K.K Vs the State of Kerala

Subi Balan @ Subi Vishnu Das Vs Rajendran

T. Dhruvan, Vs State of Kerala

Burnettt Research Laboratory, Vs State of Kerala