MUHAMMED @ BAPPUTTY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These cases arise from Crime Nos.118 of 2017 and 119 of 2017 both of Karuvarakundu Police Station.

(2.) In Crime No.118 of 2017, the victim, who is a 14 year old boy, who is the second respondent herein alleged that 4 of the accused subjected the minor to unnatural offence, one after another in a cocoa grove on a day in October 2016. FIS was lodged on 29.05.2017 and crime was registered. After investigation, final report was laid for offences punishable under section 377 r/w 34 of the IPC and under sections 7 and 8 of POCSO Act. The case is now pending as S.C.No.846 of 2017 of the District and Sessions Court, Manjeri. It is stated in the Crl.M.C that the disputes have been settled between the parties and affidavits in support of the settlement have been produced as Annexures-A4 and A5 signed by respondents 3 and 4, who are the parents of the victim. They seek to quash the proceedings. In Crime No.119 of 2017, the allegation is that some time in march 2015, the same victim as in Crime No.118 of 2017 was subjected to unnatural offence by 5 other accused. FIS was laid on 29.05.2017 along with Crime No.118 of 2017. Crime was registered as Crime No.119 of 2017. After investigation, final report was laid. The second respondent is the victim and the third and fourth respondents are his parents. It is stated that the parties have resolved their disputes and affidavits signed by respondents 3 and 4 are produced as Annexures-A4 and A5. They sought to quash the proceedings.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the contesting respondents and the learned Public Prosecutor. Since the offences alleged against the accused are very serious, this Court was not inclined to quash the proceedings on consent and compromise. Hence, learned counsel for the petitioners in both cases chose to argue the matter on merits.