XXXXXXXXXX vs State Of Kerala

Dr Kauser Edappagath, J

The order passed by the Fast Track Special Court, Thiruvananthapuram (for short, 'the court below'), dismissing an application for discharge filed by the petitioner/accused is under challenge in this Crl.R.P.

The revision petitioner is the accused in S.C.No.419/2020. The 2nd respondent is the defacto complainant/mother of the victim. The offence alleged are punishable under Sections 6 r/w 5(f)(k)(l)(m)(p), 10 r/w 9(f) (k)(l)(m)(p), 11(iii) r/w 12 of the Protection of Child from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Sections 377, 506(ii) & 323 of Indian Penal Code and Section 75 of Juvenile Justice Act. The petitioner filed C.M.P.No.370/2021 (Annexure XXIV) before the court below seeking discharge invoking Section 227 of Cr.P.C. Annexure XXIV is the said petition. The court below after hearing both sides, dismissed the said petition as per the impugned order.

I have heard Sri. Pirappancode V.S.Sudhir, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri.Arun Chand, the learned Counsel for the 2nd respondent as well as Sri.C.N.Prabhakaran, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

Annexure XXIV which runs into 19 pages shows that, so many points were canvassed by the petitioner seeking discharge. However, the court below did not meet any of those points. The impugned order is not a speaking one. The court below simply stated that, the statement of the victim would prima facie show that the offence was committed by the accused and hence, there are sufficient grounds for presuming that the accused has committed offence. Accordingly, the discharge application was dismissed. Since, the court below did not consider any of the contentions of the petitioner seeking discharge, I am of the view that, the impugned order cannot be sustained. Accordingly, it is set aside. Annexure XXIV petition is remanded to the court below for fair disposal. The court below after hearing both sides, shall pass a fresh order.

Crl.R.P. is disposed of as above.