The principle of double jeopardy does not apply when the accused faces trial on distinct and separate charges.

O R D E R

This Crl.M.C. under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is at the instance of the sole accused in Crime No.635 of 2020 of Museum Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District, registered under Sections 14 read with Sections 13 and 15 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (Amended 2019) and Section 67B of the Information Technology Act, to quash Annexure-A1 FIR and Annexure-A2 charge-sheet in SC No.818 of 2022 on the file of Additional District & Sessions Court (Atrocities & Sexual Violence Against Women & Children), Thiruvananthapuram.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that Crime No.637 of 2020 of Museum Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, was registered against him under Sections 7 r/w 8, 9(l) r/w 10, 9(m) r/w 10, 9(n) r/w 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, for sexually assaulting the victim, who is a 7 year old girl, and that case was tried and he was found not guilty of the offences alleged and was acquitted under Section 232 of Cr.P.C. But he is facing trial again in SC No.818 of 2022, on charges under Sections 14 read with Sections 13 and 15 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 67B of the IT Act, on the complaint made by the very same victim. So it would amount to double jeopardy and hence, the FIR and final report in Crime No.635 of 2020 is liable to be quashed.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor pointed out that Crime No.637 of 2020 and Crime No.635 of 2020 are registered for distinct offences and the petitioner was never tried or acquitted on charges under Section 14 read with Sections 13 and 15 of the POCSO Act and 67B of the IT Act.

5. In Crime No.637 of 2020, the prosecution allegation was that the petitioner, who is the maternal Uncle of the victim girl, committed aggravated sexual assault on her on different days. But the allegations in Crime No.635 of 2020 is that the petitioner downloaded pornographic pictures of minor children including that of the victim in Crime No.637 of 2020 and misused the same. Moreover, the victim in Crime No.637 of 2020 is only one among the victims in Crime No.635 of 2020. Since the offences alleged in Crime No.635 of 2020 are distinct and separate, and the petitioner never faced trial for the offences alleged in Crime No.635 of 2020, Section 300 of Cr.P.C. has no application, in the given set of facts.

Hence, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed, as it is devoid of any merit.

The trial court shall proceed with the trial in S.C.No.818 of 2022, and dispose it of at the earliest.

Sd/-

SOPHY THOMAS JUDGE DSV/-

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 11322/2023 PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES :

Annexure A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR DATED

28.07.2020 IN CRIME NO. 635/2020 OF MUSEUM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

AnnexureA 2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED

25.03.2022 IN CRIME NO. 635/2020 OF MUSEUM POLICE STATION FILED BEFORE THE HON'BLE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT (POCSO)

AT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

Annexure 3 A COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 22/10/2022 IN SC.358/2022.

RESPONDENTS’ ANNEXURES : NIL