Back
A. BADHARUDEEN
Abin Joseph, S/o Joseph – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
ORDER :
This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking quashment of Annexure A4 order in C.C.No.657/2018 on the files of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kanjirappally.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor in detail.
3. While challenging Annexure-A4 order, whereby the learned Magistrate, after considering evidence of PW2 and PW3, decided to commit the case on the allegation that during examination of PW1, PW2, PW3 as well as PW10, offences under Sections 9 and 10 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (`POCSO Act' for short) and Section 82 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (`JJ Act' for short) are made out, the learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently would submit that the trial court wrongly interpreted the ingredients to attract offences under Sections 9 and 10 of the POCSO Act as well as Section 82 of the JJ Act as per the FIR, and as per Annexure-A3 final report, none of the offences found during investigation by the police. According to him, none of the overt acts would attract the offences punishable under
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 conviction under the POCSO Act was upheld amidst witness discrepancies, highlighting the importance of victim's consistent testimony; sentence was modified to five years for proportionality based....
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 court held that insufficient evidence for penetrative assault warrants acquittal under specific POCSO sections, yet convicted the appellant for lesser sexual assault under Section 9(n).
The court confirmed convictions under the POCSO Act and SC/ST (POA) Act for aggravated sexual assault on a minor, while acquitting the accused of IPC Section 504 due to insufficient evidence of provo....
The court ruled that insufficient evidence of penetration under Section 6 of the POCSO Act led to a conviction under Section 10 for aggravated sexual assault.
The necessity of proving penetration or manipulation causing penetration for charges under the POCSO Act was emphasized, leading to a conviction for attempted offences.
Conviction in sexual offences can be established on the reliable testimony of the victim's mother, supporting the conviction under POCSO and IPC despite some evidence being contested.
Point of law: Section 42(A) of the POCSO Act, Section 31 of Cr.P.C., need not be strictly followed while awarding the punishment of imprisonment for offence under the POCSO Act.
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
