Back
A. K. JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, SYAM KUMAR V. M.
Jaleel – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala Rep. By Public Prosecutor – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, J.
When the case was taken up for hearing, it was reported to us by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/accused that the appellant has expired on 07.04.2024. Taking note of the said submission, we have to examine whether the appeal would abate in terms of Section 394(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure [Cr.P.C.]. We note, in this connection, that the conviction of the appellant was for the offences under Section 376 (2) (f) (i) (n) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5 (l) (n) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences [POCSO] Act, 2012 and the prosecution case was that he had repeated sexual intercourse with his own daughter, who was only 12 years of age and studying in the 7th Standard. The learned Sessions Judge found the appellant guilty of the offence under Section 376 (2) (f) (i) (n) of IPC and Section 5 (l) (n) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/-and in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for another three months. It was further directed that the fine amount, if realised, w
The court applied Section 394(2) of the Cr.P.C. to determine the abatement of the appeal and the modification of the sentence and compensation in a case involving the death of the appellant.
The court considered the provisions of Section 394(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Full Bench judgment of the Court in Pazhani vs. State of Kerala, 2017 (1) KHC 173, to determine the aba....
The recoverability of fines, including compensation, even after the default sentence has been served, as established in the case of Kumaran v. State of Kerala & Anr.
The court ruled that the prosecution failed to prove the victim's age as below 18 years, thus the POCSO Act was not applicable, leading to a modification of the conviction under IPC.
Rule 9 deals with grant of compensation.
Marriages after the crime can nullify the basis for prosecution under certain conditions.
The conviction of the accused for the brutal murder and rape of a child was upheld, applying the principle of last-seen theory and circumstantial evidence under Sections 302 IPC and 6 of the POCSO Ac....
Sentencing under the POCSO Act must adhere to the law in effect at the time of the offense, and courts can consider the duration of custody when determining appropriate sentences.
Wider issue about sustainability of conviction in cases with such factual background may also require scrutiny by Court where victim is living voluntarily with accused.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
