Veerankutty Vs. State of Kerala

Veerankutty vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Nov 28, 2013

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1099969

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1099969
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice P.Bhavadasan
Decided On: Nov 28, 2013
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Veerankutty

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....2012. the allegation against the petitioner is that he had raped his own daughter and she had conceived as a result of the same.3. it is unnecessary to go into further details for the simple reason that it is now brought to the notice of this court that the parties have settled the matter out of court. on finding that the de facto complainant has given a statement to the police about crl.m.c no.3300/2013 2 her stand that she had no complaint against the petitioner, this court directed the learned sessions judge, manjeri to conduct an enquiry into the matter, as per the order dated 04.09.2013. in pursuance to the said order, a report has been filed on 10.09.2013. though the learned sessions judge says that there is no settlement, it is interesting to note that in the report what is stated is that there is no settlement because there was no such incident at all. to be more precise, the conclusion of the report reads as follows: "according to the de facto complainant and her mother, the incident alleged in the case did not take place and so there was no occasion for any settlement of the matter in the case. the enquiry conducted by me reveals that the matter in s.c.no.244/2013 has not been settled between the de facto complainant and the accused, and that the settlement claimed by the petitioner (accused) in crl.m.c.3300/2013 is not true". the report fortifies the statement given by the girl to the police.4. considering the totality of the circumstances especially the life of the girl involved and also the family life of the petitioner as well as other members, it is felt that continuance of crl.m.c no.3300/2013 3 the proceedings will not be in the interest of anyone. therefore, this crl.m.c is allowed and all further proceedings in s.c.no.244/2013 on the file of the sessions court, manjeri shall stand quashed and the petitioner shall stand discharged. p.bhavadasan judge smp

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN THURSDAY, THE28H DAY OF NOVEMBER20137TH AGRAHAYANA, 1935 Crl.MC.No. 3300 of 2013 --------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER

IN Bail Appl. 4878/2013 DATED1507/2013 ... SC NO.244/2013 OF SESSIONS COURT,MANJERI CRIME NO. 1009/2012 OF KONDOTTY POLICE STATION , MALAPPURAM .... PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ VEERANKUTTY, AGED46YEARS, S/O.ASSAINAR, CHOYAKKODE HOUSE, CHEEKODE.P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.S.RAJEEV SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRA KRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT & STATE: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031 (CRIME NO.1009/2012 OF KONDOTTY POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT).

2. MARIYUMMA, W/O.VEERANKUTTY, CHOYAKKODE HOUSE, CHEEKODE.P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676 512. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. P.MAYA R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.SAMSUDIN THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON2811-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss Crl.MC.No. 3300 of 2013 ----------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES: -------------------------------------------- ANNEXURE-I CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.1009/2012 OF KONDOTTY POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE-II AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED2906/2013. ANNEXURE-III COPY OF ORDER

DATED1507.2013 BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN BA.4878/2013. RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES: ----------------------------------------------- N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss P.BHAVADASAN, J.

--------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.3300 OF2013--------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of November, 2013. ORDER

This Crl.M.C is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to have all further proceedings in S.C.No.244/2013 on the file of the Sessions Court, Manjeri quashed.

2. The petitioner, who is the father of the victim, stands accused of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 313 and 376 of Indian Penal Code, Section 23 of the Juvenile Justice Act, Section 5(j)(ii)(l)(n) and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The allegation against the petitioner is that he had raped his own daughter and she had conceived as a result of the same.

3. It is unnecessary to go into further details for the simple reason that it is now brought to the notice of this Court that the parties have settled the matter out of court. On finding that the de facto complainant has given a statement to the Police about Crl.M.C No.3300/2013 2 her stand that she had no complaint against the petitioner, this Court directed the learned Sessions Judge, Manjeri to conduct an enquiry into the matter, as per the order dated 04.09.2013. In pursuance to the said order, a report has been filed on 10.09.2013. Though the learned Sessions Judge says that there is no settlement, it is interesting to note that in the report what is stated is that there is no settlement because there was no such incident at all. To be more precise, the conclusion of the report reads as follows: "According to the de facto complainant and her mother, the incident alleged in the case did not take place and so there was no occasion for any settlement of the matter in the case. The enquiry conducted by me reveals that the matter in S.C.No.244/2013 has not been settled between the de facto complainant and the accused, and that the settlement claimed by the petitioner (accused) in Crl.M.C.3300/2013 is not true". The report fortifies the statement given by the girl to the Police.

4. Considering the totality of the circumstances especially the life of the girl involved and also the family life of the petitioner as well as other members, it is felt that continuance of Crl.M.C No.3300/2013 3 the proceedings will not be in the interest of anyone. Therefore, this Crl.M.C is allowed and all further proceedings in S.C.No.244/2013 on the file of the Sessions Court, Manjeri shall stand quashed and the petitioner shall stand discharged. P.BHAVADASAN JUDGE smp

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2013 Same Parties Veerankutty vs State of Kerala Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice P.Bhavadasan