IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.GIRISH MONDAY, THE 2^ND DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 12TH JYAISHTA, 1947 CRL.MC NO. 3542 OF 2025 CRIME NO.784/2021 OF KODUNGALLUR POLICE STATION, THRISSUR AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN SC NO.46 OF 2022 OF FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT, (POCSO) IRINJALAKUDA PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:

PRASAD K P AGED 34 YEARS S/O. PRAKASHAN, KALACHIRA HOUSE, ERISSERIPALAM, KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR, PIN – 680669.

BY ADVS.

SRI.V.S.THOSHIN SMT.NAKSHATRA SHIKA RESPONDEN T ( S )/COMPLAINAN T :

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682031.

SMT PUSHPALATHA M.K., SR PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.06.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The prayer in this petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, is a direction to the Fast Track Special Court (POCSO), Irinjalakkuda, to release the mobile phone of the petitioner who was the accused in SC.No.46/2022 on the files of that Court. The aforesaid case was quashed by this Court upon an application filed by the victim as CRL.M.C.No.1806/2022.

2. A report was call for from the learned Sessions Judge as to whether the mobile phone sent for analysis at FSL had been received back at that Court. In her report dated 28.05.2025, the learned Sessions Judge stated that the mobile phone concerned is presently with the said court and that it was not returned to the petitioner since the petitioner did not provide the password or lock pattern of that phone to enable the said court to delete the objectionable images contained in it.

3. As already stated above, this is a case where the proceedings against the petitioner/accused were quashed at the request of the defacto complainant/victim who filed Crl.MC.No.1806/2022 before this Court. Once the above application has been allowed and all further proceedings in SC. No.46/2022 have been quashed by this Court, the trial court is not expected to further embark upon enquiry as to whether the above mobile phone contained objectionable images. So also, the trial court is not expected to refuse the release of the mobile phone to the petitioner/accused stating the reason that it could not be accessed due to the failure of the petitioner to provide password or lock pattern. Needless to say that the request of the petitioner for a direction to the trial court to release his mobile phone, is perfectly justified.

In the result, the petition stands allowed. The Special Judge, Fast Track Special Court (POCSO), Irinjalakkuda, is directed to release the mobile phone of the petitioner upon proper receipt.

Sd/-

G. GIRISH, JUDGE

mea

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3542/2025 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure 1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL MC NO. 1806/2022 DATED 27/06/2022 IS ANNEXURE 1.

Annexure 2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 5/04/2024 THROUGH HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY IS ANNEXURE 2.

Annexure 3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE EXAMINATION REPORT DATED 30/08/2024 OF THE REGIONAL FORENSIC SCIENCE LABORATORY THRISSUR IS ANNEXURE 3.