ORDER

This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed to quash all further proceedings in C.C. No. 81 of 2018 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Ernakulam under Section

482 of the Cr.P.C.

2. The petitioners are the accused Nos. 1 to 6. The offence alleged against them is punishable under Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for short, 'the JJ Act').

3. The petitioners are the respective mothers of the juvenile victims. The prosecution case in short is that, on 16.06.2017, at about 10.45 a.m. the petitioners were found with their children aged 1 to 12 years in their possession, procured them to participate in the agitation demanding to stop the installing of IOC plant at Puthuvypu and while they were proceeding from Puthuvypu junction to High Court junction at Ernakulam, they were arrested by the Sub Inspector of Police, Mulavukad at Bolgatty junction. Thereby the accused have committed the offence punishable under Section 75 of the JJ Act.

4. I have heard Sri. T.N. Suresh, the learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt. Pushpalatha, the learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that even if the entire allegation in the FIS together with the materials collected during the investigation are taken at their face value, no offence punishable under Section 75 of the JJ Act has been made out.

6. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the ingredients of Section 75 of the JJ Act is clearly attracted and as a prima facie case is made out, the jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. cannot be invoked.

7. Section 75 of the JJ Act reads as follows:-

'75 Whoever, having the actual charge of, or control over, a child, assaults, abandons, abuses, exposes willfully neglects the child or causes or procures the child to be assaulted, abandoned, abused, exposed or neglected in a manner likely to cause such child unnecessary mental or physical suffering, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years or

with fine of one lakh rupees or with both:

PROVIDED THAT in case it is found that such abandonment of the

child by the biological parents is due to circumstances beyond their control, it shall be presumed that such abandonment is not willful and the penal provisions of this section shall not apply in such cases:

PROVIDED FURTHER that if such offence is committed by any person employed by or managing an organization, which is entrusted with the care and protection of the child, he shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment which may extend up to five years, and fine which may extend up to five lakhs rupees:

PROVIDED ALSO that on account of the aforesaid cruelty, if the child is physically incapacitated or develops a mental illness or is rendered mentally unfit to perform regular tasks or has risk to life or limb, such person shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment, not less than three years but which may be extended up to ten years and shall also be liable to fine of five lakhs rupees.”

8. A reading of the above section would show that in order to attract Section 75 of the JJ Act, the child should be assaulted, abandoned, abused, or willfully neglected in a manner likely to cause such child unnecessary mental or physical suffering. In the absence of any allegation that juveniles were subjected to mental or physical suffering, it cannot be said that offence punishable under the JJ Act is attracted. (see Khalid L.K. v. Sub Inspector of Police, Kasaragod and Another [2015(4) KHC 180] and Rajan @ Raju v. Sub Inspector of Police, Feroke police Station and Others [2018 (5) KHC 967]

9. In Annexure A1 charge sheet, five occurrence witnesses are cited. The 161 statements of the occurrence witnesses are produced as Annexures A2 to A6. A reading of the said statement as well as the case records would show that, the prosecution has absolutely no case that the petitioners caused any unnecessary ment