[POCSO Act] Quashing Of Serious Offence To Efface Evidence Already Recorded Cannot Be Done Even At Instance Of Survivor: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court dismissed a petition filed by the victim of a POCSO offence to quash the proceedings saying that serious offences are involved and the trial had reached at the end stage.
The Court noted that that the accused is alleged of committing serious offences like aggravated penetrative sexual assault against the minor. The accused was the father of the victim. He is accused to have committed the offences from the period of April 2013 to 21.02.2016. The prosecution alleges commission of offence under Sections 4 r/w 3, 6 r/w 5(n)(l), 8 r/w 7 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO). It is also alleged that he threatened to kill the victim if she reveals the matter to anyone.
The victim said that she wanted to quash the proceeding as she and her mother were compelled to give evidence in tune with the statements recorded by police. She said that she was referred to counselling in school as she was poor in studies. She stated that she revealed her bitter experiences from her father to the Counsellor when the Counsellor explained to her the concept of 'good touch and bad touch'. She stated that pursuant to the revelation, a complaint was filed and the crime was registered.
The prosecution informed the Court that the evidence is completed and only pronouncement of judgment is pending. He informed the Court that at an earlier instance, an attempt was made by the accused to recall the victim and her mother as witness on the ground that certain important questions were not asked to them. The petition was dismissed by the trial court. Against this, he approached the High Court where it was dismissed again.
Justice A. Badharudeen observed that the victim had filed for quashment with an intention to efface the evidence she had already given before the court on oath. The Court said that quashment at this stage cannot be allowed.
“.. where evidence was already completed, quashment of the proceedings, involving very serious offences under the POCSO Act, sought for by the victim before pronouncement of judgment, could not be allowed..”
Accordingly, the petition was dismissed.
Counsel for the Petitioners: Advocates M. P. Ashok Kumar, Bindhu Sreedhar, Asif N.
Counsel for the Respondents: Advocates Mathew Kuriakose, MP Prasanth (PP)
Case No: Crl.M.C. No. 9315 of 2022
Case Title: xxx v State and Another
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 798