1. This criminal miscellaneous case is field by the petitioner, who is the accused in S.T.No.779/2012 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Ettumanoor, to quash the proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter called the 'Code').

2. It is alleged in the petition that he was made an accused in Crime No.844/2011 of Gandhi Nagar Police Station, alleging that he had committed the offence punishable under Section 23 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter called the 'Act'). The crime was registered on the basis of the allegation that, the girl child aged below 18 years was brought to the house of the petitioner and without providing education, kept in the house for three years and she was asked to do some work in the house, thereby he had committed the offence punishable under section 23 of the above said Act. After investigation, final report was filed before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Ettumannoor, and it was taken on file as S.T.No.779/2012. Even assuming that the entire allegations are accepted as true, there is no offence under section 23 of the Act is attracted. Further the victim girl has no case before the police that she was subjected to cruelty and in fact her statement will go to show that she has been looked after by them affectionately. So under the circumstances, even if the case is allowed to proceed, there is no possibility of conviction, as no offence is made out. It will only an abuse of process of court. So he prayed for the intervention of this court to quash the proceedings and filed this application, seeking the following relief:

“In the above circumstances, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash all further proceedings of S.T.No.779/2012 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ettumanoor, as it is an abuse of process of court.”

3. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that even going by the allegations in the final report and also the statement of the victim girl, no offence under Section 23 or any other Provisions of the Act can be attracted. So, there is no purpose in allowing the prosecution to continue and he prayed for quashing the proceedings.

5. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that, since the child has been kept in the house without providing any basic necessity of education and making her to do house hold work will amount to an offence under the Act. So it is not a question to be considered at this stage to quash the proceedings.

6. It is an admitted fact that, the victim girl was found in the house of the petitioner and she was helping them in the house hold work. It is also seen from the documents produced that she was below the age of 18 years and so she is a child, who requires care and protection under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. The allegation in the final report, namely Annexure-A1 reads as follows:

“MALAYALAM”

7. Admittedly, the petitioner is not the guardian or parent of the victim girl. So there is no possibility of this petitioner being giving any education to the victim arises.

8. Section 23 of the Act reads as follows:

“23. Punishment for cruelty to juvenile or child. Whoever, having the actual charge of, or control over, a juvenile or the child, assaults, abandons, exposes or wilfully neglects the juvenile or causes or procures him to be assaulted, abandoned, exposed or neglected in a manner likely to cause such juvenile or the child unnecessary mental or physical suffering shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or fine, or with both.

9. Section 24 of the Act reads as follows: “24. Employment of juvenile or child for begging.

(1) Whoever employs or uses any juvenile or the child for the purpose or causes any juvenile to beg shall be