High CourtsSingle Bench

XXXXXXXXXX vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 14 June 2024 · Citation: (2024) 06 KL CK 0119

HON’BLE JUDGES
A. Badharudeen, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 482 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 376, 376(2)(n), 450 · Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 3(a), 4, 5(j)(ii), 5(l), 6
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 5939 Of 2022
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 407 words

A. Badharudeen, J

1.

This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to quash all further proceedings in Annexure A1 FIR and Annexure A2 Final Report in S.C.No.819/2020 on the files of the Ist Additional Sessions Court, (Special Court for POCSO), Kollam, arose out of Crime No.312/2020 of Kundara Police Station, Kollam Rural District.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. I have perused the relevant records.

3.

In this matter, the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 450, 376, 376(2)(n) of the IPC and Sections 4 r/w Section 3(a), 6 r/w Section 5(j)(ii) and 5(l) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (for short, ‘the POCSO Act’ hereinafter) and the prosecution allegation is that, the accused herein made an affair with the de facto complainant, promising her to marry through Tik-Tok. Thereafter, at 10.45 p.m. on a day, during the month of November 2019, the accused trespassed upon the house of the minor victim and subjected her to forceful sexual intercourse. Thereafter, before the Christmas day in the year 2019 also, the accused repeated sexual intercourse on promising marriage and later, the de facto complainant became pregnant.

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioner argued at length to substantiate this Court that the allegations in the prosecution would not make any offences, since the sexual intercourse is the outcome of consent. Accordingly, he prayed for quashment of the proceedings. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that now, the victim girl filed affidavit conceding quashment of this proceedings.

5.

The learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed quashment of the proceedings, based on the affidavit filed by the victim, where the prosecution alleges commission of serious offences.

6.

In this case, a minor, aged 17 years, was subjected to sexual intercourse, after maintaining an affair and she was subjected to rape on a day during November 2019 and on a day before Christmas during 2019. Thereafter, she become pregnant. In such a case, involving offences against a minor victim, the affidavit filed by the minor victim now attained majority, is not a ground to quash the proceedings.

In view of the matter, the quashment prayer stands disallowed and the this Criminal Miscellaneous Case stands dismissed.

The trial court is directed to go for trial, since sufficient materials are available, prima facie, to see commission of the above offences.