SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Ker) 1300

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A. Badharudeen, J.
X – Petitioner
Versus
State Of Kerala, Represented By Public Prosecutor – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 361 OF 2023
Decided On : 14-11-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: P.Sanjay, Rahul Raj P., Kiran Narayanan, Prasoon Sunny, Amrutha M. Nair, Paul Varghese (Pallath), Biju Meenattoor
For the Respondent: PP, M P Prasanth

IMPORTANT POINT
The court ruled that a mother's delay in reporting her daughter's pregnancy, due to trauma, does not constitute a deliberate failure under the PoCSO Act, justifying quashment of proceedings against her.

Headnote:

(A) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Section 19(1) - Quashment of proceedings - The petitioner, mother of the victim, was accused of failing to report her daughter's pregnancy under Section 19(1) - The court found that the mother's trauma and shock justified her delay in reporting, thus quashing the proceedings against her. (Paras 6 and 7)

(B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - The inherent power of the High Court to quash proceedings is invoked when the circumstances warrant it, particularly in cases where the accused is also a victim of the crime. (Paras 6 and 7)

ORDER :

A. Badharudeen, J.

The petitioner in this Crl.MC is the 2nd accused in S.C.No.929 of 2021 on the files of Special Court under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012 (for short ‘PoCSO Act’, hereinafter) Thrissur. The petitioner seeks quashment of the above proceedings by invoking power under Section 482 of the code of Criminal Procedure.

2. In this matter, the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under sections 4(1) r/w 3(a), 6(ii) r/w 5(j)(ii) of PoCSO Act and sections 540 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’ hereinafter) by the 1st accused, and offence under section 21 r/w 19(1) of PoCSO Act by the 2nd accused, who is the mother of the victim. In a nut shell the prosecution allegation is that when the victim aged 17 years felt abdominal pain and there was no menstruation for a period of five months, the 2nd accused, mother took her to XXX Hospital, XXX, and the Gynaecologist therein advised her to have scan examination doubting PCOD. On scan examination, it was found that the victim had completed 18 weeks of pregnancy and she was immediately referred to Government Medical College for further management. But the doctor failed to inform the same to the police on 31.5.2021. Later, on 3.6.2021, the doctor informed the same to police treating the case as medico-legal case (MLC) and on 4.6.2021 FIR was registered recording the statement of the victim in the presence of the mother, the petitioner herein. The allegation against the petitioner, who is none other than the mother of the victim is that she failed to intimate the occurrence to the police in tune with the mandate of section 19(1) of POCSO Act, thereby she committed offence under section 21 r/w 19(1) of PoCSO Act.

3. While, seeking quashment of the proceedings against the 2nd accused, the mother, it is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that it is true that as stated by the doctor and as alleged by the prosecution, initially the minor was taken to XXX hospital on 31.5.2021 and on scan examination it was found that she was pregnant. Soon, she was referred to Government Medical College for further management and care. However, the victim was taken to a private hospital, and treated. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that on knowing the pregnancy of her unmarried minor girl aged 17 years, the petitioner become shocked and in the midst of shock, she was assigned with the task of saving the life of her daughter and thereby, the minor was taken to a private hospital and given proper treatment. While so, the doctor informed the matter to the police on 3.6.2021 and accordingly, without much delay the statement of the victim was recorded on 4.6.2021 in the presence of the petitioner and crime was registered on 4.6.2021 itself. The learned counsel pointed out the ordeal and trauma of the mother who also is forced to face trial along with the 1st accused who destroyed the life of her daughter, for an offence for which she has no mens-rea.

4. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, section 19(1) of PoCSO Act does not stipulate a specified time to provide the information regarding commission or apprehension that an offence under PoCSO Act is likely to be committed. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, in cases where allegation of non-compliance of Section 19(1) is alleged against the parents of the victim, the mental strain as well as the desperating emotions that immediately wave through the mind of the parents as such are to be taken into consideration while addressing the question as to whether there is any deliberate omission in providing the information, on their part. According to the learned counsel, since the pregnancy was detected on 31.5.2021 and FIS was given on 4.6.2021, a delay of 4 days could not be the foundation to send the mother of victim to gallows who suffered a lot due to the trauma suffered by her daughter. Accordingly, it is submitted by

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top