Babu Salam vs State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 11759 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
   THURSDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 25TH KARTHIKA, 1945
                      CRL.MC NO. 8623 OF 2022
     CRIME NO.396/2022 OF Kuttiyadi Police Station, Kozhikode
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

          BABU SALAM
          AGED 58 YEARS
          S/O. MUHAMMUHAJI, OTHAYOTH HOUSE,, NARIPPATTA. P.O.,
          KOZHIKODE., PIN - 673506
          BY ADVS.
          K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN
          N.P.ASHA
          M.P.PRIYESHKUMAR


RESPONDENT/STATE/VICTIM:

    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
          PIN - 682031
    2     XXXXXXXXXX
          XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
          BY ADVS.
          PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
          SHAJIN S.HAMEED




          SRI VIPIN NARAYAN (SR PP)


     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.11.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 CRL.MC NO. 8623 OF 2022                          2




                                        ORDER

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.396/2022 of

Kuttiyadi Police Station, Kozhikode District, alleging

commission of offences under Sections 7 and 8 of Protection of

Children from Sexual Offenes Act. The matter is now pending

as S.C. No.11/2023 before the Fast Track Special Court,

Nadapuram.

2. Allegation against the petitioner is that, on

20.09.2022, at about 09.15 A.M , the accused kissed on the

right cheek of the victim boy aged 13 years and also attempted

to kiss on his lips and tried to put hand inside trouser of the

victim, and thereby, the petitioner 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 has been settled and the de facto complainant/ the

mother of the victim has been executed an Annexure II affidavit

to that effect. It is submitted that, in the affidavit it is stated

that the complaint was raised on a false notion and based on

the misunderstanding of her son. In the affidavit, it is also

stated that the de facto complainant/ mother of the victim

does not intend to continue with the proceedings against the

petitioner. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would

submit that even if the entire allegations are accepted, no

offence as alleged can be made out against the petitioner and

the pertinent statement regarding the alleged incident (in the

First Information Statement) reads as follows:-

''അയാൾ പാൽക്കുപ്പി എടുത്തു കൊണ്ടുവന്നു വീടിന്റെ കോലായിലെ ഇരുത്തിയിൽ വെച്ച ശേഷം, മുറ്റത്തേക്കിറങ്ങി വന്ന് മുറ്റത്ത് നിൽക്കുകയായിരുന്ന എന്നെ ചേർത്തുപിടിച് എന്റെ വലതു കവിളിൽ ഉമ്മ വെച്ചു . ഞാൻ തല മാറ്റിക്കളഞ്ഞു . അയാൾ വീണ്ടും എന്റെ ചുണ്ടിൽ ഉമ്മ വെക്കാനും, എന്റെ ട്രൗസറിനുള്ളിൽ കയ്യിടാനും നോക്കിയപ്പോൾ ഞാനയാളെ തള്ളി മാറ്റി ഇരുത്തി. ''

4. The learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel

appearing for the de facto complainant/ 2nd respondent would

confirm that the entire issues leading to registration of Crime

No.396/2022 have been settled and the de facto complainant does

not wish to proceed against the petitioner.

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. 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 S.C. No.11/2023 on the file of the Fast Track

Special Court, Nadapuram (arising out of Crime No.396/2022

of Kuttiyadi Police Station, Kozhikode District), will stand

quashed as against the petitioner.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE ajt

APPENDIX

ANNEXURE 1 - CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR ALONG WITH FIS IN CRIME NO.396/2022 OF KUTTIYADI POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. ANNEXURE II - NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT AFFIDAVIT DATED 21.11.2022 SWORN BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 BEFORE THE NOTARY PUBLIC ANNEXURE III - CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.396/2022 OF KUTTIYADI POLICE STATION