No Double Jeopardy: Kerala High Court Refuses To Quash Rape Case Against Alleged Fraudster Monson Mavunkal
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (October 23) refused to quash a rape case lodged against alleged fraudster Monson Mavunkal, for allegedly sexually assaulting a girl over a span of about 21 months.The infamous antique dealer has allegedly defrauded many people by selling them fake antiques. He reportedly had connection with many politicians and higher police officials in Kerala....
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday (October 23) refused to quash a rape case lodged against alleged fraudster Monson Mavunkal, for allegedly sexually assaulting a girl over a span of about 21 months.
The infamous antique dealer has allegedly defrauded many people by selling them fake antiques. He reportedly had connection with many politicians and higher police officials in Kerala. Once allegations against him came out, several women came out accusing him of sexual harassment.
In the instant case, Mavunkal was alleged of committing crimes punishable under Sections 342 (wrongful confinement), 506(i) (criminal intimidation), 354A(1)(iv) (making sexually colured remarks), 376(2)(f) (Rape by person in authority) and 376(2)(n) (repeated rape) of Indian Penal Code.
In the quashing plea, he argued that he was already tried for similar offences in another case against the same victim. He argued that the similar offences should have been tried together and therefore this case is barred by the rule against double jeopardy.
The prosecution submitted that the incident in the other case (SC 1318/ 2021) occurred before the crime alleged in the instant case (SC 404/ 2022).
It pointed that the other case pertains to a specific incident that happened on July 26, 2019 and during that time the victim was a minor.
In the instant case, the allegation is that the accused sexually molested the victim after she attained majority during the period from 11.01.2020 till 24.09.2021.
Justice A. Badharudeen noted that as per Section 223(c) of CrPC, the accused can be tried for offences of the same kind committed within a period of 12 months. The Court noted there is more than 12 months gap between these alleged incidents.
"In the present crime, the allegation as to commission of offences is from 11.01.2020 till 24.09.2021. If at all the principle under Section 223(4) is applied, the accused could have been tried for the overt acts done starting from 26.07.2019 to 25.07.2020 only and not for the offences committed from 26.07.2021 to 27.09.2021." (sic)
The Court further held that during the time of the other crime, the victim was a minor. Therefore, it cannot be held that the accused was tried for the offences committed from 11.01.2020 to 24.09.2020.
The Court concluded that principal of jeopardy cannot be applied and the instant is case is not barred under Section 300 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, the petition was dismissed.
Counsel for the Petitioners: Advocate M. G. Sreejith
Counsel for the Respondents: Senior Public Prosecutor Adv. Renjit George
Case No: Crl.M.C. 4032 of 2024
Case Title: Monson M. C. @ Monson Mavunkal v State of Kerala and Others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 665