Kerala High Court
Krishnankutty @ Kannan vs State Of Kerala on 4 March, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
Friday, the 4th day of March 2022 / 13th Phalguna, 1943
CRL.M.APPL.NO.1/2021 IN CRL.A NO. 943 OF 2021
SC 186/2017 OF IST ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT(SPECIAL COURT), PALAKKAD
PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:
KRISHNANKUTTY @ KANNAN ,AGED 46 YEARS ,S/O.KANDAYI, CHERUMVEEDU,
MANGAMADA, NELICHODE, POTHUNDI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678 508.
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/STATE& DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.
Application praying that in the circumstances stated therein the
High Court be pleased to suspend the sentence imposed on the
petitioner/appellant by the Sessions Court , Palakkad Division in
S.C.No.186/2017 vide judgment dated 21.04.2021 , in the interest of
justice.
This Application coming on for orders upon perusing the application
and upon hearing the arguments of M/S. P.K.VARGHESE, P.S.ANISHAD, K.R.ARUN
KRISHNAN, SANJANA RACHEL JOSE, Advocates for the petitioner and the PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR for the respondent, the court passed the following:
P.T.O
DR.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
-------------------------------------------------
Crl.M.A.No.1 of 2021
in
Crl.A No.943 of 2021
--------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 4th day of March, 2022
O R D E R
This is an application to suspend the execution of sentence.
2. The petitioner stands convicted for the offence
punishable under Sections 450 and 376(2)(l) of IPC and Section 6
r/w Section 5(k) and Section 6 r/w 5(j)(ii) of the Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act (for short 'POCSO Act'). He
was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of
five years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- under Section 450 of
IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 20
years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- under Section 6 r/w
Section 5(k) of POCSO Act. No separate sentence is imposed
under Section 376(2)(l) of IPC.
3. I have heard Sri.P.K.Varghese, the learned counsel for
the petitioner and Smt.Sheeba Thomas, the learned Public
Prosecutor.
Crl.M.A.No.1 of 2021 in
4. The learned Public Prosecutor has filed a detailed
objection and she has vehemently opposed the application.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted there
is a long delay in giving the complaint against the petitioner
and that PW7 in the box could not say about the date and year
of the alleged sexual assault.
6. The victim is a mentally retarded girl, aged 17 years
at the time of incident. Ext.P12 disability certificate issued by
the medical board proves the same. There is a clear evidence to
show the penetrative sexual assault. Already there is a finding
of the competent court that the evidence of the victim can be
relied on. The case of the prosecution is that on account of the
rape committed by the petitioner, the victim became pregnant
and thereafter her pregnancy was terminated by PW11.
Considering the fact that a mentally retarded girl aged 17
years was brutally ravished by the petitioner, I am not inclined
Crl.M.A.No.1 of 2021 in
to suspend the execution of sentence. Accordingly, the petition
stands dismissed.
Sd/-
DR.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
JUDGE
ab
04-03-2022 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar
