Muhammed Haneefa P.M. v. State of Kerala

# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** # **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS** **TUESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 12TH KARTHIKA, 1942** **Crl.MC.No.4160 OF 2020(H)** **SC 313/2019 OF FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT, KALPETTA** ## **PETITIONER/ACCUSED:** **MUHAMMED HANEEFA P.M., AGED 34 YEARS, S/O. HAMEED, PALLIYALITHODUKA, PARALIKKUNNU, KAMBALAKKAD, MUTTIL NORTH AMSOM, WAYANAD DISTRICT PIN 673 122.** **BY ADVS. SRI.MATHEW KURIAKOSE SHRI.MONI GEORGE** ## **RESPONDENTS/STATE & VICTIM:** **1 STATE OF KERALA (CRIME NO. 270/2019 OF THIRUNELLY POLICE STATION) REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 031** - **2 X** **SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ADV. J.KRISHNAKUMAR (ADOOR) FOR R2** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** ## ALEXANDER THOMAS, J. --------------------------------------Crl.M.C. No. 4160 of 2020 --------------------------------------Dated this the 3[rd] day of November, 2020 ## O R D E R The prayer in the above Criminal Miscellaneous Case filed under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C. is as follows: _“.......quash Annexure A charge sheet cum final report in Crime No.270/2019 of Thirunelly Police Station in Wayanad District and all further proceedings in SC No.313/19 now pending on the files of the Fast Track Special Court, Kalpetta.”_ 2. Heard Sri.Mathew Kuriakose, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner (sole accused), Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for R-1 (State) and Sri.Jayakrishakumar (Adoor), learned counsel appearing for R-2 (lady victim). 3. The petitioner herein has been arrayed as the sole accused in the instant FIR in Crime No.270/2019 of Thirunelly Police Station, Wayanad district, for offences punishable under Secs.354A & 341 of the IPC and Secs.10 r/w 9(f) of the POCSO Act, 2012 and Secs.3(1)(xx)(i) (ii), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, as amended, on the basis of the FIS given on 16.8.2019 by the 2[nd] respondent lady victim who was then a minor aged 17 years, in respect of the alleged incidents which happened on Crl.M.C. No. 4160 of 2020 ..3.. 15.8.2019. The police after investigation has filed Anx.A final report/charge sheet in the instant crime for the abovesaid offences. Initially the case was registered before 1[st] Addl. Sessions Court notified to deal with POCSO Cases, Kalpetta, Wayanad district, and later the case was transferred to Fast Track Special Court (Kalpetta), Wayanad district, wherein the case is now pending as Sessions Case S.C. No. 313/2019. 4. The gist of the prosecution is that, the petitioner then aged 33 years was a teacher in the school in which the 2[nd] respondent lady victim was studying and that the petitioner belongs to Muslim community and that the 2[nd] respondent victim belongs to Scheduled Tribe (Adiya) community, and that the petitioner knew that she belonged to Scheduled Tribe community. That, on 15.8.2019 when a function in the school was going on, the petitioner had come near the girl and had put his face near her face by stating that he wants to hug her, and also tried to hug her, and thereby the petitioner has committed the abovesaid offences. The petitioner would allege that the abovesaid offences are falsely foisted on him by those who have professional envy to him. 5. According to the prosecution the date of birth of the ..4.. Crl.M.C. No. 4160 of 2020 2[nd] respondent victim is 7.8.2002 and that she was aged 17 years at the time of incident on 15.8.2019, and that later she has completed the majority age of 18 years on 7.8.2020. 6. The petitioner would point out that, later after the 2[nd] respondent had completed the majority age, she has sworn to Anx.C affidavit dated 11.9.2020 stating that the entire disputes which she had with the petitioner had resolved and she had made the allegations on account of misunderstandings, and that she is not interested to proceed with the impugned criminal proceedings any further and that she has no objection in quashing the impugned criminal proceedings, etc. 7. The learned Public Prosecutor was requested to get instructions in the matter and today when the matter has been taken up for consideration it is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor on the basis of the instructions of the Investigating Officer concerned that, the Investigating Officer had conducted an enquiry and also recorded the statement of the 2[nd] respondent victim and also revealed that, now the 2[nd] respondent has completed the majority age of 18 years and that she has sworn to Anx.C affidavit voluntarily and she has informed that the facts Crl.M.C. No. 4160 of 2020 ..5.. stated therein are correct and that she has no objection in quashing the impugned criminal proceedings and it appears that the stand taken by the 2[nd] respondent appears to be one which is voluntarily taken by her without any coercion or pressure etc. 8. The main allegations raised against the petitioner does not disclose any offence of penetrative sexual assault. The allegations are to the effect that, on the day in question the petitioner had come near the 2[nd] respondent lady victim and had moved his face near to her face by saying that he wants to hug her and tried to hug her, etc. The enquiry conducted by the Investigating Officer also revealed that the 2[nd] respondent has voluntarily filed Anx.C affidavit etc. 9. In a catena of decisions, the Apex Court has held that, in appropriate cases involving even non-compoundable offences, the High Court can quash prosecution by exercise of the powers under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C., if the parties have really settled the whole dispute or if the continuance of the prosecution will not serve any purpose. Here, this Court finds a real case of settlement between the parties and it is also found that continuance of the prosecution in such a situation will not serve any purpose other Crl.M.C. No. 4160 of 2020 ..6.. than wasting the precious time of the court, when the case ultimately comes before the court. On a perusal of the petition and on a close scrutiny of the investigation materials on record and the affidavit of settlement and taking into account the attendant facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the legal principles laid down by the Apex Court in the cases as in _**Gian Singh** v._ _**State of Punjab**_ reported in 2013 (1) SCC (Cri) 160 = (2012) 10 SCC 303 and _**Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and anr**_ . reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, more particularly paragraph 29 thereof, could be applied in this case to consider the prayer for quashment. 10. Taking note of the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and also taking into account the allegations raised in this case and also the present stand of the 2[nd] respondent lady victim and also taking note of the fact that the allegations raised in this case do not disclose any serious offence of penetrative sexual assault and as the 2[nd] respondent has now completed the majority age of 18 years, etc this Court is of the considered view that the plea for quashment could be considered in the facts and circumstances of the case. Accordingly it is ordered that, the Crl.M.C. No. 4160 of 2020 ..7.. impugned Anx.A final report/charge sheet filed in Crime No.270/2019 of Thirunelly Police Station, Wayanad district which has now led to the pendency of Sessions Case S.C. No. 313/2019 on the file of the Fast Track Special Court (Kalpetta), Wayanad district, as against the petitioner accused and all further proceedings emanating therefrom as against the petitioner accused will stand quashed and set aside. 11. The petitioner will produce a certified copy of this order before the Investigating Officer concerned as well as before the Fast Track Special Court (Kalpetta), Wayanad district, who is dealing with S.C.No.313/2019 for necessary information and further action. With these observations and directions, the above Criminal Miscellaneous Case will stand disposed of. ## **Sd/-** ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE MMG Crl.M.C. No. 4160 of 2020 ..8.. ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** |**ANNEXURE A**|**CERTIFIED COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET**| |---|---| ||**CUM FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.**| ||**270/2019 OF THIRUNELLY POLICE STATION**| ||**IN WAYANAD DISTRICT**| |**ANNEXURE B**|**CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR AND FI**| ||**STATEMENT IN CRIME NO. 270/2019**| ||**THIRUNELLY POLICE TATION IN WAYANAD**| ||**DISTRICT**| |**ANNEXURE C**|**AFFIDAVIT OF THE RESPONDENT NO. 2**| ||**DATED 11-09-2020**|