Back
Akhil Johny – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
ORDER :
1. This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the petitioner, who is the accused in Crime No. 965/2020 of Vanchiyoor Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, now pending as S.C. No. 2426/2022 on the files of the Special Court for the trial of offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short ‘the PoCSO Act’ hereinafter), Thiruvananthapuram and the prayer herein is as under:
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the relevant materials available.
3. The prosecution allegation as narrated in FIR is that, the accused, with intention to download and share child pornography in the computer, mobile phone and hard disk owned by him, visited child pornography websites on his desktop computer and downloaded child pornography video files to his mobile phone and hard disk. This is the base on which, the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Section 15(1) of the PoC
Aswin, S/o. Murali VS State Of Kerala Represented By Public Prosecutor,High Court Of Kerala - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 21: State of Kerala (supra)
**Explanation**: The provided text references "State of Kerala (supra)" as a prior decision where "this Court held that..." specific outcomes (e.g., quashing proceedings, no offenses made out). It appears to be cited descriptively as precedent ("supra" indicates a prior cited case), but no explicit judicial treatment keywords (e.g., followed, overruled, distinguished) are present. The snippet discusses holdings on automatic downloading, offenses not made out, and statutory presumption, but does not indicate how this case has been treated in subsequent decisions. Treatment is unclear and ambiguous based on the limited information; no basis to categorize as bad law or any positive/negative treatment pattern.
Possession of child pornography without intent to share or transmit does not constitute an offence under the PoCSO Act and IT Act.
Automatic or accidental downloading of pornographic material involving children is not an offense under Section 67B of the IT Act if specific intention is not established.
Possession of child pornographic material requires proof of intent to transmit; mere downloading without intent does not constitute an offence under applicable laws.
Intentional downloading of material is necessary to attract the offence under Section 67B of the IT Act.
The discharge application stage does not permit a mini trial, and the focus should be on whether there are grounds for presuming that the offence has been committed.
(1) Child Pornography – Sexual exploitation of children is a pervasive and deeply rooted issue that has plagued societies worldwide and has been a matter of serious concern in India – Increasing inci....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the interpretation of Section 15 of the POCSO Act before and after the amendme....
Important points:The alleged publication of the photograph of the 2nd respondent during the time of the inaugural function of the Jewellery is admittedly, by itself cannot be said to be in any manner....
Serious offences under the POCSO Act cannot be quashed based on compromise or victim's affidavit, reaffirming the need for societal protection.
The court upheld the applicability of POCSO Act offences while quashing charges under the JJ Act, affirming that the police could investigate without a Magistrate's order.
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
