Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 34057
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Kauser Edappagath, J
K.NIRMALAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 66 OF 2020
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.K.K.VIJAYAN, SRI.K.R.RAJESHKUMAR, SRI.G.RANJU MOHAN, SRI.B.VINOTH, SMT.LINA S.
For the Respondents: SRI.SANAL P.RAJ-PP
No prima facie case established against petitioners for offences of trafficking, forgery, and exploitation; allegations do not substantiate claims under relevant statutes.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 370(1), (2), (3), (5), 468, and 471 r/w Section 34 - Indian Railways Act, 1989 - Section 137(1)(a) - Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 - Section 79 - Quashing of criminal proceedings against accused - Allegations of trafficking did not establish sufficient prima facie evidence against accused; necessary elements such as coercion and exploitation under Section 370 were not proven - Final report's claims did not substantiate forgery under Sections 468 and 471 - Proceedings quashed as no useful purpose in continuation. (Paras 2, 12)
(B) Criminal Procedure Code - Section 482 - High Court’s inherent power to quash proceedings where no case is made out. (Para 12)
Facts of the case:
Final report filed against seven accused, alleging trafficking of juveniles under various statutes, including creating false documents to indicate minors reached adulthood. The petitioners argued no case was made against them.
Findings of Court:
There was no prima facie evidence against the petitioners under the alleged charges, thus proceedings were quashed.
Issues: Whether the allegations against the petitioners constituted a valid offence, and if so, whether there was adequate material to proceed.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that without allegations of coercion or exploitation, charges under trafficking laws were unfounded, affirming the lack of evidence needed for forgery and exploitation claims.
Result: Criminal miscellaneous cases allowed, proceedings quashed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of charges against accused. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding lack of offences. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. analysis of evidence and case facts. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. review of specific legal provisions. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. final decision to quash prosecution. (Para 12) |
O R D E R
These criminal miscellaneous cases have been filed to quash the final report in Crime No.314 of 2016 of Railway Police Station (Parassala), Thiruvananthapuram.
2. The Railway Police (Parassala), Thiruvananthapuram registered the above crime against seven accused persons alleging offences punishable under Sections 370 (1), (2), (3), (5), 468 and 471 r/w Section 34 of IPC , Section 137(1)(a) of the Indian Railways Act, 1989 and Section 79 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 . After investigation, the final report was filed against seven accused persons before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Neyyattinkara alleging the above mentioned offences. The learned Magistrate received the final report on file and initiated committal proceedings as C.P.No.27 of 2019 since sessions offences were involved.
3. The crux of the allegation in the final report in short is that the accused Nos.1 to 3 being the Councillor, Purchase Manager and Placement Co-ordinator respectively of the company IL & FS Ltd., trafficked 145 people including 16 juveniles from Odisha State to Kerala on 20/10/2016 enticing job at the Kanyakumari Exports (4th accused company) and thereby exploited them. It is further alleged that the documents were falsely created to make it appear that the juveniles mentioned above have in fact attained the age of majority.
4. The petitioner in Crl.M.C.No. 1196 of 2020 is the accused No.3 and the petitioner in Crl.M.C.No. 66 of 2020 is the accused No.7. These criminal miscellaneous cases have been filed on the ground that no offence is attracted against them.
5. I have heard Smt.Sruthy N. Bhat, the learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.M.C.No.1196 of 2020, Sri.Ranju Mohan, the learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.M.C.No.66 of 2020 and also Sri.Sanal P.Raj, the learned Public Prosecutor.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the allegations in the final report, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, do not prima facie constitute an offence or make out any case against the petitioners. The learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.M.C.No.1196 of 2020 submitted that the petitioner is only an employee of IL & FS Company, which was authorised to impart training to the employees and in the absence of the company in the party array, he cannot be made an accused. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that there are materials on record to connect the petitioners with the crime, and when a prima facie case is made out, the jurisdiction vested with this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. cannot be invoked.
7. A reading of the final report would reveal that CW1, the Sub Inspector of Police, Railway Police Station, Parassala, received information that around 150 persons including juveniles were being transported in coach Nos. S7 and S8 of the Ananthapuri Express train from Chennai to Thiruvananthapuram for the purpose of exploitation. Based on the said information, he went and inspected the bogies of the above train on 20.10.2016 at 11.30 a.m., where he found 145 persons, including 16 juveniles, without valid travel documents. Accordingly, he registered FIR. According to the prosecution, during the investigation, it was revealed that the above mentioned persons were brought by IL & FS Ltd. from Odisha for the purpose of employment at accused No.4 company and with intention of exploiting the juveniles by engaging them in the hazardous work. It is alleged that the documents were falsely created to make it appear that the juveniles had attained the age of majority. According to the petitioner, the IL & FS Ltd. is one of the leading infra
