Kerala High Court
Xxxxxx vs State Of Kerala on 22 October, 2024
2024:KER:78654
CRL.REV.PET NO. 868 OF 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 / 30TH ASWINA, 1946
CRL.REV.PET NO. 868 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 27.06.2024 IN SC
NO.816 OF 2023 OF FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT, (POCSO)
KUNNAMKULAM
REVISION PETITIONER/PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
BY ADVS.
K.N.ABHILASH
SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT
RISHI VARMA T.R.
RITHIK S.ANAND
SREELAKSHMI MENON P.
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680503
3 XXXXX
XXXXX
XXXXX
SRI.RENJIT GEORGE, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 22.10.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:78654
CRL.REV.PET NO. 868 OF 2024
2
ORDER
Dated this the 22nd day of October, 2024
This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed
under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to set
aside Annexure A8 order dated 27.06.2024 in
Crl.M.P.No.213/2024 in S.C.No.816/2023 on the files of the
Fast Track Special Court, Kunnamkulam, Thrissur. The
revision petitioner herein is the accused in the above case.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the revision
petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor in detail.
3. In this matter, even though originally offence
under Section 354 A of IPC alone was alleged, during the
evidence stage before the Magistrate Court, the victim stated
about coitus at the instance of the revision petitioner, who is
none other than the brother of the victim, while she was
studying in the 5th standard. It is relevant to note that no such
statement was given before the police at any point of time
prior to giving such evidence before the trial court. Acting on
2024:KER:78654
CRL.REV.PET NO. 868 OF 2024
the evidence given by the victim, the trial court altered the
charge by incorporating offence under Section 376 of IPC
also and committed the matter before the Sessions Court
and now the Sessions Court has framed charge for the
offence under Sections 354A(1)(i) and 376 of IPC.
4. Even though the learned counsel for the
revision petitioner argued that there are serious disputes in
between the siblings and pendency of multiple cases to
disbelieve the prosecution case, when this Court is not
inclined to consider the same for quashing the proceedings,
in a case where materials are made out prima facie, the
learned counsel for the revision petitioner sought permission
to withdraw this petition, with a plea to grant at least four
months time to the revision petitioner to come back to India
and face trial since he has been employed abroad and he is
not in a position to come to India and cooperate with the trial.
5. In view of the above submission,
quashment prayer stands dismissed by deferring the trial of
2024:KER:78654
CRL.REV.PET NO. 868 OF 2024
the matter and appearance of the revision petitioner before
the trial court for a period of four months from today, with
direction to the Special Court to try the matter only after four
months, taking note of the contentions raised herein, and
also in consideration of the fact that this matter is in between
two siblings.
Registry is directed to forward a copy of this order to
the jurisdictional court for information and further steps.
Sd/-
A. BADHARUDEEN
JUDGE
nkr
