Xxxxxx vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 8330 Ker

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
  FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JULY 2022 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1944
                    CRL.MC NO. 4337 OF 2022
  AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN SC 227/2021 OF SPECIAL
                COURT UNDER POCSO ACT, MANJERI
         CRIME NO. 362/2020 OF MANKADA POLICE STATION
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

            XXX
            BY ADV K.RAKESH


RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:

    1       STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
            KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, PIN - 682031
    2       THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
            MANKADA POLICE STATION,
            MALAPPURAM DISTRICT
            PIN - 673576
            BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

            SMT T V NEEMA -SR PP


        THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl.M.C.No.4337 of 2022


                                 ..2..




                              ORDER

Annexure F order dismissing an application filed under

Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. is under challenge in this Crl.M.C.

2. The petitioner is the accused. He faces trial for the

offences punishable under Sections 366, 377 of the IPC and Section

3(d) r/w 4, 5(f) r/w 6 of the POCSO Act.

3. After the examination of the entire prosecution

witnesses, the prosecution filed a petition to issue summons to the

Headteacher of Madrassa and also to produce documents pertaining

to the appointment of the petitioner as teacher as well as admission

records with regard to the details of the victim therein as a student

and also to give evidence. The court below allowed the said petition

as per the impugned order. The said order is under challenge in this

Crl. M.C.

4. I have heard Sri. K. Rakesh, the learned counsel for the

petitioner and Smt. T.V. Neema, the learned Senior Public Crl.M.C.No.4337 of 2022

..3..

Prosecutor.

5. The prosecution allegation is that, the petitioner, who is

a Madrassa teacher, sexually assaulted the victim, who is a student.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the present

petition has been filed after the examination of all the prosecution

witnesses, and if it is allowed, it will cause prejudice to the

petitioner. It is settled that Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. as well as

Section 91 of the Cr.P.C. can be invoked at any stage of the

proceedings, if it is necessary for just decision. Since, the case of

the prosecution is that, the petitioner, while serving as a Madrassa

teacher, sexually assaulted the victim, it is necessary to prove that

the petitioner was employed as the Madrassa teacher in the

Madrassa. It is for that purpose, the documents have been

summoned.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

there would not be any proper records in the Madrassas to show the

appointment of teachers, the details of the students etc. and hence, it Crl.M.C.No.4337 of 2022

..4..

is easy to manipulate the same. I am of the view that, the said

apprehension of the petitioner can be alleviated by giving an

opportunity to challenge those documents in accordance with law.

The petitioner can also cross-examine the witnesses. In these

circumstances, I see no merit to interfere with the impugned order.

Accordingly, it is dismissed with the above observations.

Sd/-

DR.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JUDGE RMV/01/07/2022