SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 27040

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
... – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 452 OF 2023|CRIME NO.372/2021|S.C.No.671/2021



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.M.R.SARIN
For the Respondents: SMT.SNEHA JOY, PP. SMT. C.SEENA

Quashing of POCSO proceedings allowed due to victim settlement and less serious offences post-majority.

Headnote:The petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. invoked Sections 366A, 354, 354

(D), 109 r/w 34 IPC and Sections 12 r/w 11(iv), 17 r/w 16 POCSO Act, arising from prosecution case where accused allegedly enticed a minor victim and outraged her modesty. Court noted settlement post-victim attaining majority and her unwillingness to proceed. Primary issue framed as whether proceedings could be quashed given settlement despite POCSO involvement. Ratio emphasized less serious nature of allegations against specific accused and victim's explicit statement, permitting quashing in interest of justice. Proceedings in S.C.No.671/2021 quashed against respondents 2 & 3.

Table of Content
1. petition to quash proceedings in pocso case. (Para 2)
2. victim settled dispute, unwilling to proceed. (Para 3)
3. quashing allowed considering settlement. (Para 5)

ORDER

Dated this the 10thday of April, 2026 The defacto complainant in S.C.No.671/2021 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court (PoCSO), Harippad, arising out of Crime No.372/2021 of Mavelikkara police station, filed this Crl.M.C. underSection 482ofCr.P.C., praying for quashing all further proceedings against respondents 2 & 3, the accused persons in the above case. The offences alleged against respondents 2 & 3 are underSections 366A, 354, 354(D), 109 r/w 34andSections 12 r/w 11(iv), 17 r/w16 ofProtection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. 2. The prosecution case is that the 1staccused after pretending love enticed the defacto complainant, a minor girl, took her on 01.05.2021 at about 3.30 a.m., with the help of the 2ndaccused, to various places and outraged her modesty.

3. According to the learned counsel, now the victim became major and she had settled the entire dispute between herself and the respondents 2 & 3 and also that she does not want to proceed with this case.

4. The petition was opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor.

However, upon instructions she submitted that the defacto complainant had already given signed statement to the SHO stating that the matter has been settled and that she does not want to proceed with this case.

5. Though the offence under the PoCSO Act were also involved, the gravity of the offence alleged against respondents 2 & 3 are less serious in nature. Therefore, considering the fact that the matter has been settled and the defacto complainant herself approached this court for quashing the proceedings against respondents 2 & 3, I am inclined to allow this Crl.M.C.

In the result, this Crl. M.C is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioner in S.C.No.671/2021 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court (PoCSO), Harippad, arising out of Crime No.372/2021 of Mavelikkara police station, stands quashed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top