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

2025 Supreme(Ker) 156

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A. Badharudeen, J.
Dr. V.K. Sulochana W/o. Dr. K.C. Viswanathan - Appellant
Vs.
State Of Kerala Represented By The Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Kerala - Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 2310 OF 2022
Decided On : 04-02-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : K.T.Bosco, P.Darly John
For the Respondent: Jibu T S, PP

Criminal liability under the POCSO Act requires a deliberate omission to report a crime, which was not established in this case.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act - Sections 19(1) and 21 - Quashing of proceedings against the 3rd accused for failure to report a crime under POCSO Act - The court held that there was no deliberate omission on the part of the petitioner to report the crime, as the initial doctor had already informed the police, and thus, the prosecution was unwarranted. (Paras 5, 14, 15)

(B) Criminal culpability - The court emphasized that for a person to be held criminally liable for failure to report under POCSO, there must be a deliberate omission, which was not established in this case. (Paras 6, 9, 12)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a doctor, was accused of failing to report a crime under the POCSO Act after treating a minor victim who became pregnant. The initial report was made by another doctor, and the FIR was registered subsequently.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the petitioner did not have a reasonable opportunity to report the crime, as the initial doctor had already done so, and thus quashed the proceedings against her.

Issues: The main issues were whether the petitioner had a duty to report the crime and whether her actions constituted a deliberate omission.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the failure to report must be a deliberate omission to establish criminal liability under the POCSO Act, which was not present in this case.

Result: Petition allowed; proceedings quashed against the petitioner.

ORDER :

This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to quash all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure.A1 Final Report in Crime No.884/2021 of Ollur Police Station, Thrissur, now pending as S.C. No.929/2021 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] (1st Additional District and Sessions Court), Thrissur. The petitioner herein is the 3rd accused in the above case.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor, in detail. Perused the Final Report and the decisions placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

3. In this matter, the prosecution allegation is that, at about 13.30 hours on a day in the last week of January, 2021, the 1st accused trespassed upon the residence of the minor victim, aged 17 years and subjected her to sexual intercourse and as a result of the same, the minor victim became pregnant. On this premise, the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 450 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 4(1) read with 3(a), 6(ii) read with 5(j)(ii) of the POCSO Act, as against the 1st accused.

4. The prosecution allegation against the petitioner, who is the 3rd accused and the mother of the victim, who the 2nd accused is that, they failed to report the crime to the Police as provided under Section 19 of the POCSO Act and thereby they committed the offence punishable under Section 21 read with 19(1) of the POCSO Act.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued to substantiate that the petitioner/3rd accused is absolutely innocent of the allegations and there was no deliberate omission on the part of the doctor to inform the crime to the Police. In this connection it is submitted that, as per the statement given by the victim, it was stated that, she met Dr.Indu M.R. of Aswini Hospital, Thrissur, when there was no menstruation for a period of five months and the doctor advised to do scan examination. On scan examination, it was found that the victim was four months pregnant and accordingly, she was directed to go to Government Medical College Hospital and treat accordingly. In tune with the statement given by the victim, the learned counsel read out the statement given by Dr.Indu M.R., Aswini Hospital, Thrissur. In the statement of Dr.Indu M.R., she stated that she attended the minor victim and found that the she was pregnant and accordingly, she was sent to Government Medical College Hospital, Thrissur, for further treatment. The doctor's statement would show further that, since she found the same as MLC, it was reported on 03.06.2021 and the CMO of the hospital forwarded the same on 04.06.2021 to the Police. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, in this matter, the FIR was registered on 04.06.2021 and the same would reveal that the First Information Statement of the victim was recorded while she was undergoing treatment at GEM Hospital, Thrissur, where the petitioner herein treated her. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the pregnancy of the victim was first noticed by Dr.Indu M.R. on 31.05.2021 and on noticing the pregnancy of the minor victim, the doctor reported the same as MLC on 03.06.2021 and the CMO of the hospital forwarded the same on 04.06.2021 to the Police and the FIR was registered on 04.06.2021 itself. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner further that, though Dr.Indu M.R. advised the minor victim to have further treatment at Government Medical College, Thrissur, the victim opted her treatment at GEM Hospital, Thrissur, when there occurred bleeding and for the first time the petitioner had occasion to meet the victim was only on 02.06.2021 and accordingly she was given treatment and the pregnancy got aborted, to save the life of the vic

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