A. BADHARUDEEN
Aswin, S/o. Murali – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala Represented By Public Prosecutor,High Court Of Kerala – Respondent
ORDER :
This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (`BNSS’ for short) seeking quashment of Annexure-1 final report and proceedings pursuant thereto in S.C.No.305/2022 on the files of Fast Track Special Court, Alathur.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor in detail. Perused the relevant documents, including Annexure-1 final report.
3. The prosecution case is that the accused herein was found in possession of child sexual exploitative and abuse material in his mobile phones used with BSNL and Airtel SIMs downloaded at 7.30 am on 04.10.2020 by the first witness. Accordingly, the same were recovered and crime was registered alleging commission of offences punishable under Section 67B of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Section 15(1) r/w 2(1)(da) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (`POCSO Act’ for short). While seeking quashment of the proceedings on the submission that none of the offences is made out prima facie, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that as per the ratio of the decision of this Court reported in [2024 LiveLaw Ker 376 :
Sebin Thomas VS State Of Kerala Represented By Public Prosecutor - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 569: No keywords or phrases indicating judicial treatment (e.g., followed, distinguished, criticized, questioned, overruled, reversed, abrogated) are present in the provided description. The entry only summarizes the central legal point established in the judgment, with no information on how it has been treated in subsequent decisions.
Sebin Thomas VS State Of Kerala Represented By Public Prosecutor - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 569: Treatment is unclear due to absence of any explicit indicators of judicial treatment in the provided case law description. Without such language, it cannot be objectively categorized into positive, negative, or other treatment patterns.
Possession of child pornographic material requires proof of intent to transmit; mere downloading without intent does not constitute an offence under applicable laws.
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.
(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....
Intentional downloading of material is necessary to attract the offence under Section 67B of the IT Act.
The necessity of strict proof of the age of the victim in child pornography cases, the relevance of expert testimony in determining the age of the model, and the application of Section 45 of the Indi....
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.
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.
Prompt and proper reporting of commission of offence under POCSO Act is of utmost importance – Non-reporting of sexual assault against a minor child despite knowledge is a serious crime and more ofte....
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.