Back
Kerala High Court Rejects Bail for Father Accused of Sexually Assaulting His Minor Daughter
The has firmly denied a application filed by a father accused of sexually assaulting his 17-year-old daughter. In a stern order, Hon'ble Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath emphasized that cases involving the sexual exploitation of minors are not subject to private settlements, even when initiated by the victim's family.
A Case of Betrayal
The petitioner, Shiju, faced charges under . The prosecution alleged that the accused committed multiple acts of sexual assault against his daughter between February and . The accused, who was remanded to on , argued for his release on the grounds that he was innocent and that a settlement had been reached with the victim's mother.
The Question of Compromise
During the proceedings, the defense presented an affidavit from the mother of the victim, claiming that the dispute was resolved and that she no longer wished to pursue the case. The defense contended that this settlement should facilitate the petitioner's release. However, the Senior Public Prosecutor opposed the plea, highlighting the gravity of the intentional criminal acts involved.
Legal Analysis: The Fence Devouring the Crop
In its assessment, the Court observed that the mother’s attempt to settle the matter amounted to a total disregard for the welfare of the minor child. Justice Edappagath remarked that the situation was one where
"the fence itself is devouring the crop,"
highlighting the failure of guardians to act in the best interests of a vulnerable victim.
The court reiterated that offences under the POCSO Act are . Relying on the precedent of , the bench underscored that parents or guardians have no legal standing to withdraw or compromise criminal proceedings for . The state has an independent, non-negotiable duty to prosecute such offences to protect the rights of minor victims under the jurisdiction of the court.
Key Observations
-
"The case depicts the tragic plight of a minor girl, aged 17 years, who was repeatedly subjected to sexual exploitation by her own father."
-
"Any compromise or out-of-court settlement effected by the parents of a minor victim with the object of stifling criminal prosecution cannot receive the sanction of law."
-
"Courts, in the exercise of their jurisdiction, bear a bounden duty to safeguard the rights of minor victims of sexual assault, even where parents fail to do so."
Final Ruling
The High Court ultimately dismissed the bail application, maintaining that the gravity of the allegations and the nature of the crime precluded any possibility of relief. The decision serves as a significant legal reminder that the judicial system will not permit private family agreements to undermine the protection of minors in cases of sexual violence.
