Kerala High Court
Narayanan@Kuttan Mestri vs State Of Kerala on 25 October, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA
Friday, the 25th day of October 2024 / 3rd Karthika, 1946
CRL.M.APPL.NO.1/2024 IN CRL.A NO. 1159 OF 2024
SC 1053/2017 OF FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR
APPELLANT:
NARAYANAN@KUTTAN MESTRI
S/O SUBRAHMAN, AGED 57 YEARS , IYYATTIPARAMBIL VEEDU NAIKKALATHUKADU
DESOM VALLIVATTOM VILLAGE, THRISSUR, PIN - 680124
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
Application praying that in the circumstances stated therein the
High Court be pleased to suspend the conviction as well as the sentence
passed by the Special(POCSO) Court, Iringalakuda as per judgment dated
26.03.2024 in Sessions Case No. 1053/2017 and to release the
petitioner/appellant on bail in the interest of justice.
This Application coming on for orders upon perusing the
applicationand upon hearing the arguments of H.NUJUMUDEEN, ANTONY SHYJU,
P.M.MOHAMMED HASSAN, SIMI M JACOB, NAVAS HARID, AFSAL N.A., SHERIN ACHU
NINAN, AFNAS MEERAN, Advocates for the petitioner and of the PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR for the respondent the Court passed the following:
C.S.SUDHA, J.
-------------------------------------------------------
Crl.M.A.No.1/2024 in Crl.A.No.1159 of 2024
and Crl.A.No.1159 of 2024.
----------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 25th day of October 2024
ORDER
This application under Section 389(1) of the Cr.P.C. has
been filed seeking suspension of sentence of the applicant/accused
in S.C.No.1053/2017 on the file of the Court of Session, Thrissur.
The applicant/accused has been found guilty of the offences
punishable under Section 5(l) read with Section 6 of the PoCSO
Act and Section 377 IPC. He has been sentenced to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for 10 years for the offence punishable
under Section 6 of the PoCSO Act. No separate sentence has been
passed for the offence punishable under Section 377 IPC in the
light of Section 42 of the PoCSO Act.
2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
Crl.M.A.No.1 of 2024 in Crl.A.No.1159 of 2024
and Crl.A.No.1159 of 2024.
applicant/accused that the evidence on record is totally
unsatisfactory to prove the prosecution case. The victim, a
boy aged 15 years, does not have a consistent version. His
statements before various authorities differ. The
statements are contradictory and contain material
inconsistencies. The incident is alleged to have taken
place inside a bathroom which was under construction and
therefore the occurrence of the incident is also improbable.
It is also pointed out that the victim has no acquaintance
with the accused and therefore yet again another
improbability in the commission of the offence. The
learned counsel also points out that the victim had made
the accusation against three persons out of which one had
committed suicide and the other died. It was against a
dead person the allegation of sexual assault had been
made. The testimony of the victim is not of sterile quality
and therefore the trial court went wrong in finding him
guilty and convicting him. On these grounds, he
Crl.M.A.No.1 of 2024 in Crl.A.No.1159 of 2024
and Crl.A.No.1159 of 2024.
canvasses for an order of suspension of the sentence.
3. Per contra, it was submitted by the learned
public prosecutor that this is a case in which an young boy
was sexually abused by more than one person and
therefore, there is possibility of inconsistencies coming up
in his statement which cannot be in the facts and
circumstances of the case be considered to be material to
affect the core prosecution case. No special circumstances
are made out for suspending the sentence.
4. Heard both sides.
5. On going through the impugned judgment, I
find that the allegations against the applicant/accused here
is quite serious. Separate sentence under Section 377 was
not awarded only because Section 42 of the PoCSO Act.
The child was only 15 years old at the time of the incident.
It is also brought to my notice by the learned public
prosecutor that the child had minor mental issues, which
was taken advantage of by the accused. The accused
Crl.M.A.No.1 of 2024 in Crl.A.No.1159 of 2024
and Crl.A.No.1159 of 2024.
herein was 56 years at the time of the incident. As the
allegations against the applicant/accused are serious, this
Court is not inclined to invoke its discretionary
jurisdiction of suspending the sentence and therefore, the
application is dismissed.
Call for TCR.
Post for hearing to 19/08/2025.
Sd/-
C.S.SUDHA
JUDGE
Jms
25-10-2024 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar
