In a significant ruling, the Kerala High Court observed that cases involving serious offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) cannot be quashed solely based on a settlement affidavit filed by the victim, even if the victim has attained majority. The judgment reaffirms the stringent purpose of the POCSO Act and its mandate to ensure the protection of children from sexual offences.

"In the instant case, it is discernible that the accused started relationship with the victim offering to marry her and continued the same. In the meanwhile, on offering promise of marriage he had coitus with the victim repeatedly. In such a case, prima facie, the above offences are made out. In fact, serious offences under the POCSO Act could not be settled on the strength of affidavit filed by the victim at a subsequent stage even after attaining majority" held the Kerala High Court.

Background of the Case

The petitioner, sought to quash criminal proceedings initiated against him under Sections 450, 376(2)(n), 354, 354A(1)(i), 354D(1)(i), 354D(1)(ii) of the Indian Penal code, Section 4 r/w 3, 6(1) r/w 5(l), 8 r/w 7, 10 r/w 9(l), 12 r/w 11(iv), 15 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Section 66E of Information Technology Act. The case arose from allegations that he had repeatedly engaged in sexual intercourse with the victim—a minor at the time—on the pretext of a promise to marry her. Despite the victim later filing an affidavit declaring the matter settled, the prosecution opposed the quashing of the case.

Key Observations by the Court

1. The prosecution's allegations indicated clear prima facie offences under Sections 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 of the POCSO Act, among others.

2. The Act was enacted to protect minors from sexual exploitation. Settlements between the accused and the victim, especially in cases involving heinous offences, undermine the statute's core intent.

3. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the court held that serious crimes cannot be dismissed merely on the basis of affidavits. This is particularly relevant in cases where public interest is at stake, as these crimes have a broader societal impact.

4. The court observed that even if a victim turns hostile during the trial, their statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. can be used to corroborate the prosecution’s case.

Contrasting Precedents

The petitioner cited the Madras High Court ruling in Vijayalakshmi & Ors. v. State & Ors., where consensual relationships among adolescents were differentiated from serious POCSO offences. However, the Kerala High Court clarified that such judgments are per incuriam when applied to cases involving serious offences under the POCSO Act, as highlighted by the Supreme Court in Ramji Lal Bairwa v. State of Rajasthan.

Verdict

The court dismissed the petition, holding that:

1. Settlements through affidavits cannot absolve the accused of serious offences under the POCSO Act.
2. Quashing cases under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is not justified in instances where prima facie heinous crimes are established.

Cause Title: Akhil Mohanan V/S State of Kerala

Case No: Crl MC No. 60 of 2024

Date: December-16-2024

Bench: Justice A. Badharudeen

[Read/Download order]