SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 7206

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
------ – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 569 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.1033/2023



Important Points

The court directed timely proceedings in juvenile cases, balancing settlement interests with the serious nature of alleged offences.

Subject

Criminal Law - Juvenile Justice

Act Referred

Headnote

This judgment involves a petition filed by a juvenile in conflict with law under Section 528 of the BNSS for quashing proceedings in ST.No.41/2024, linked to Crime No.1033/2023, concerning serious offences under IPC and POCSO Act. The court recognized the settlement between the petitioner and the defacto complainant but emphasized the serious nature of the offences. Consequently, the court directed the Juvenile Justice Board to expedite the case processing within six months.

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.ROHIT BABEN
For the Respondents: SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR -SRI.BREEZ M.S.

Table of Content
1. juvenile petition for quashing proceedings (Para 1)
2. settlement between parties (Para 2 , 3)

O R D E R Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2026 A juvenile in conflict with law involved in ST.No.41/2024 pending before the Juvenile Justice Board, Palakkad, arising out of Crime No.1033/2023 of Vadakkancherry Police Station, Palakkad, filed this petition under Section 5 28 of the BNSS praying for quashing all further proceedings against him. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 3 77 of IPC , Sections 4 r/w 3(a), 6 r/w 5(l), 5(m), 5(n) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, now the entire dispute between the petitioner and the defacto complainant is settled. Therefore, he prayed for quashing all further proceedings against the petitioner.

3. The learned Counsel for the 2ndrespondent/defacto complainant also submitted that the dispute between the defacto complainant and the 4. Since the offences involved int his case includesSection 377IPC and , 4, 5, and 6 of the POCSO Act, which are serious and heinous in nature, the prayer for quashing the proceedings against the 5. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for a direction to the Juvenile Justice Board to dispose of this case in a time bound manner.

6. Considering the entire facts, I am inclined to dispose of this Crl.M.C. with a direction to the Juvenile Justice Board, Palakkad to dispose of ST.No.41/2024, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Sd/-

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top