IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A. BADHARUDEEN, J.
FISAL KHAN S/O SAINUDEEN – Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Crl. M.C. No. 3553 of 2022
Decided On : 14-10-2024
Quash - Criminal Proceedings - IPC Sections, POCSO Act, JJ Act - The court quashed certain charges against the petitioner while allowing others, interpreting the relevant sections to determine the applicability of offences based on the evidence presented.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, accused in a sexual offence case, sought to quash proceedings against him, arguing that the allegations did not meet the necessary legal criteria for certain charges under IPC and POCSO Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that while some charges were not substantiated, there was sufficient evidence to proceed with charges under specific sections of the IPC and POCSO Act against the petitioner.
Issues: Whether the allegations against the petitioner met the legal criteria for the offences charged under IPC and POCSO Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the evidence did not support charges under certain IPC sections but did support charges under others, particularly focusing on the definitions and requirements of the POCSO Act.
Result: The petition was allowed in part; certain charges were quashed while others were upheld for trial.
ORDER :
1. This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to quash all further proceedings in furtherance to Annexure-1 Final Report in Crime No. 1267/2021 of Fort Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, now pending as S.C. No. 593/2022 on the files of the Special Court for the trial of cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (hereinafter referred as ‘POCSO Act’ for short) cases, Thiruvananthapuram. The petitioner herein is the 2nd accused in the above case as per the Final Report.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the defacto complainant, in detail. Perused the relevant materials available.
3. In this matter, though the petitioner is arrayed as the 2nd accused, while arraying the mother of the victim as the 1st accused, the narration in the charge runs on the premise that the petitioner herein is the 1st accused. The allegation of the prosecution is that, on 08.02.2021 in Room No. 151 of RP Days Inn Lodge in Kizhakkekotta, the mother of the victim and the petitioner herein, after sharing common intention, engaged in sexual intercourse, in the presence of the victim. The allegation is that, after reaching the lodge along with the victim, minor boy aged 16 years, the minor was sent to purchase some articles. When the minor returned along with the articles, at 20.30 hours and opened the door, he happened to see that, both of them were engaged in sexual intercourse, after being naked. When, the victim questioned the same, the petitioner herein abused the minor, caught hold on his neck, beat on his cheek and kicked him down. The other accused, who is the mother of the victim also shared common intention by not restraining the petitioner from doing the said overt acts against the minor. It is on this premise, the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 341, 323 and 34 of IPC, Section 12 read with 11(i) of the POCSO Act and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) of Children Act [hereinafter referred as ‘JJ Act’ for short], by accused Nos. 1 and 2.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner read out the FIS and submitted that, no ingredients to attract offences punishable under Sections 294(b) and 341 of IPC as well as under Section 11(i) read with 12 of the POCSO Act, made out, as against the petitioner and the other accused. He also would submit that, Section 75 of the JJ Act also would not attract as against the petitioner, since he has no actual control or custody of the victim, in any manner. Therefore, the proceedings as against the petitioner is liable to be quashed.
5. Opposing quashment, the learned Public Prosecutor specifically pointed out that offence punishable under Section 11(i) read with 12 of the POCSO Act would attract since, sexual intercourse in naked state in between the 1st and 2nd accused was seen by the minor. He also would submit that offence under Section 323 read with 34 of IPC also is made out from the statement as well as the additional statement of the victim.
6. On perusal of the statements and additional statement of the victim, it could be seen that there is allegation that the petitioner abused the minor, caught hold on his neck, beat on his cheek and kicked him down and the specific allegation is that, the victim saw the sexual intercourse between the accused persons after being naked. Even though there is allegation of using abusive words, the words are not stated in the statements and also there is nothing stated regarding wrongful confinement.
7. Coming to Section 11(i) read with 12 of the POCSO Act, the same is as under:
(i) utters any word or makes any sound, or makes any gesture or exhibits any object or part of body with the intention that such word or sound shall be hear
The court clarified the applicability of specific sections of IPC and POCSO Act based on the evidence of the case, distinguishing between the roles of the accused.
The absence of sexual intent in the victim's statements negated the applicability of the alleged offences under the IPC and POCSO Act.
(1) Sexual harassment of child – Settlement of POCSO offences, acting on affidavit filed by victim or their parents, is not legally permissible.(2) Mere sending of messages or having chats with a chi....
The court established that for offences under the PoCSO Act, evidence of sexual intent in communications is essential to constitute a prima facie case.
The court ruled that allegations of sexual harassment under the POCSO Act must be evaluated on evidence, even amidst claims of family rivalry, necessitating a trial.
The court ruled that mere transportation of a minor without sexual intent does not constitute offences under IPC or PoCSO Act, allowing the quashment of proceedings.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of establishing the intent behind the actions alleged in offenses related to obscenity and insult to modesty, highlighting the need for prima facie evidence to ....
The court upheld the committal order based on prima facie evidence of aggravated sexual assault and corporal punishment under the POCSO Act and JJ Act.
The court ruled that no prima facie case existed against the accused as the victim had attained majority and voluntarily left with him, leading to the quashment of proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.....
The court can quash proceedings under the PoCSO Act when the dispute is settled between parties and the allegations are deemed less serious.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.