IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 12^TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 21ST PHALGUNA, 1946 CRL.MC NO. 3340 OF 2021 CRIME NO.1390/2020 OF MALAYINKEEZH POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AGAINST S.C.NO.1072/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT, NEYYATTINKARA PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

XXXXX BY ADV M.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENTS/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT & CHARGE WITNESS NO.3 (MOTHER OF THE VICTIM):

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.

2 XXXXXXX XXXXXXX

3 XXXXXXX XXXXXXX BY ADVS.

MATHEW BOB KURIAN K.T.THOMAS E.C. BINEESH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

The sole accused in S.C.No.1072/2020 on the files of the Fast Track Special Court, Neyyattinkara, which arose out of Crime No.1390/2020 of Malayinkeezhu Police Station, is the petitioner herein. He seeks quashment of the crime and all further proceedings therein, on the premise that the offences alleged are not attracted, even if the prosecution allegations are presumed to be true. However, during the course of the proceedings before this Court, the matter has been settled by and between the parties and now, quashment is sought for on that premise.

2. O.P(F.C) No.597/2023 between the same parties was pending before a Division Bench, wherein the question was pertaining to the custody of child. Therein, an Order has been passed inter alia to the effect that the parties will enter into an agreement that the defacto complainant herein will not pursue the above Crl.M.C. When the Order of the Division Bench was pointed out to my notice, an Order was passed on 17.02.2025 directing the Investigating Officer to take a statement of the defacto complainant (mother-in-law) of the petitioner, as also, the wife of the petitioner (3^rd respondent herein). The same was done and the statement was recorded through mobile phone, since the petitioner's wife (3^rd respondent herein) is presently at London. The statement of the defacto complainant/grand mother, was also recorded over phone, since she is not in a position to travel, due to old age diseases. The statement of the 3^rd respondent (mother of the child in question) would indicate that herself and the child, both, are at U.K and that the child is pursuing her study therein. She is 9 years old now. It is also stated that the child is quite happy there. The statement goes to say that, for the welfare and future happiness of the child and also to keep the factum of this case as a secret, the 3^rd respondent is not interested to pursue the matter, any more. One pertinent statement is to the effect that, since the 3^rd respondent/mother has got complete rights over the child, she is disinterested to proceed with the matter. More or less to the same effect is the statement given by the defacto complainant, who is the mother-in-law of the accused.

3. This Court notice that the offences alleged are under Sections 8, 7, 12, 11(i), 11(ii) and 11(iv) of the POCSO Act, read with Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice Act. The prosecution allegation is to the effect that the petitioner/accused/father, with the necessary animus, committed sexual harassment on his daughter, who was studying in the L.K.G by disrobing her and also by disrobing himself and caressing her lips, chest and also her private parts, besides exhibiting her private areas to the mother/R3 by video call in his mobile phone, thus committing the offences enumerated above. In Annexure-B Final Report, barring the statements of the defacto complainant/mother-in-law and the 3^rd respondent/wife, there is no material, which would go to show that the accused person has committed the offences enumerated above. The mobile phone or the video clip, which allegedly exhibited the nude body of the child to the mother has not been established by any evidence, though the mobile phone was recovere