Kerala High Court
Anil.S vs State Of Kerala on 21 December, 2023
Author: P Gopinath
Bench: P Gopinath
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945
CRL.MC NO. 10612 OF 2023
CRIME NO.1436/2023 OF Aryanad Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
ANIL.S
AGED 43 YEARS
S/O. SELVARAJ, KUZHIVILA VEEDU, KEEZHKOLLA,
AMARAVILA.P.O., CHENKAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN -
695122
BY ADVS.
K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN
N.P.ASHA
S.SAJIN
RESPONDENT/STATE/COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
PIN - 682031
2 XXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
SRI. VIPIN NARAYAN, PP
SRI.SHAJIN S.HAMEED- FOR RESPONDENT
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
21.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 10612 OF 2023 2
ORDER
Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1436/2023 of Aryanad
Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District, alleging commission
of offence under Sections 354 of the Indian Penal Code and
Sections 8, 7, 10, 9c and 9f of the Protection of Children from
Sexual Offences Act.
2. The petitioner is a teacher in a Government School
where the victim is studying. Allegation against the petitioner
was that, on 01.11.2023, while an examination was progressing,
the petitioner had patted the right shoulder of the victim and by
standing very close to the victim while she was writing the
examination, he committed the offences alleged against him.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would
submit that the entire issues between the petitioner and the
victim have been settled. Learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner also refers to Annexure III affidavit executed by the
father of the victim to establish that the entire issues between the
petitioner and and his daughter have been settled and the de
facto complainant does not intend to continue with the
proceedings against the petitioner.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel
appearing for the 2nd respondent would confirm that the entire
issues between the petitioner and the victim have been settled
and the de facto complainant/victim does not wish to continue
with the prosecution in any manner. Learned counsel appearing
for the 2nd respondent would submit that the complaint was filed
on a mistaken notion and upon misunderstanding.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the
learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the defacto
complainant/. 2nd respondent, I am of the view that this is fit
case where the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C. can be invoked to quash the proceedings against the
petitioner on the ground of settlement. The principles governing
the circumstances in which this Court can exercise the jurisdiction
under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C to quash criminal proceedings in
respect of non-compoundable offences are delineated by the
judgments of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh V. State of
Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303] and State of Madhya Pradesh V.
Laxmi Narayan and Others [(2019) 5 SCC 688] . It is clear
from the reading of the aforesaid judgments that offences of
heinous nature cannot be quashed on the ground of subsequent
settlement. Here, the nature of the offences does not compel me
to hold that the proceedings cannot be quashed on the ground of
settlement. No public interest will be served by continuing with
the proceedings against the petitioner. It is unlikely that the
State will be able to successfully prosecute the case against the
petitioner. As held by this Court in Vishnu v. State of Kerala
[2023 (4) KHC 1], in the facts of this case, the affidavit of the
father of the victim can be accepted as it appears that it is filed in
the best interest of the child. In that view of the matter, I am of
the view that this is fit case where the jurisdiction of this Court
under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. can be invoked to quash the
proceedings against the petitioner on the ground of settlement.
Accordingly, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and all further
proceedings in Crime No.1436/2023 of Aryanad Police Station,
Thiruvananthapuram District, will stand quashed as against the
petitioner.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
ajt
APPENDIX
Annexure-I A true copy of the report dated 03.11.2023 submitted by the Headmistress
Annexure-II Certified copy of the Fir along with FIS in Crime No. 1436/2023 of Aryanad Police
Station, Thiruvananthapuram District
Sealed Cover 3 Annexure III- Affidavit dated 03.12.2023 sworn by the respondent No. 2 before
notary public
