Kerala High Court
A.K. Sreekumar vs State Of Kerala on 11 July, 2024
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JULY 2024 / 20TH ASHADHA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 5662 OF 2016
CRIME NO.341/2016 OF Kunnamkulam Police Station, Thrissur
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.2917 OF 2016 OF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KUNNAMKULAM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
A.K. SREEKUMAR
AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.KARUNAKARAN NAIR, EARTHAYIL HOUSE,
PUTHUPALLY VILLAGE, kOTTAYAM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
SRI.ABRAHAM P.GEORGE
SMT.M.D.BEENA
SRI.M.RAJENDRAN NAIR
SMT.M.SANTHY
RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
2 SMT.ALICE THOMAS
AGED 48 YEARS, W/O.THOMAS, CHERUVATHOOR HOUSE,
NJAMANENGAD, VADAKKEKKAD VILLAGE,
ATHULYA HOME NURSING, KUNNAMKULAM.
BY ADV.:
SMT.NIMA JACOB, PP
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C. No.5662 of 2016
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
--------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No.5662 of 2016
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 11th day of July, 2024
ORDER
This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed to quash the proceedings in C.C. No.2917/2016 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kunnamkulam as evident by Annexure-A2 final report. Annexure-A2 final report is filed against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Section 354(A) of IPC.
2. The prosecution case is that the de-facto complainant is the proprietor of Athulya Nursing Home at Kunnamkulam. She is also the Thrissur District President of the association of Home Nursing institutions. The accused is the State Secretary of the association. He used to receive money from the de- facto complainant in his capacity as State Secretary is the submission. But it was not repaid. When the de- Crl.M.C. No.5662 of 2016 3 facto complainant demanded repayment of the money, the accused abused the de-facto complainant and spread false stories to other members. On 26.09.2015, he made statements insulting the womanhood of the de-facto complainant which constrained the president to require the accused to speak with dignity is the submission. The imputations made by the accused that the de-facto complainant married 5 times and she is leading an immoral life etc., are recorded in the minutes book. Thereafter, the accused demanded the de-facto complainant to concede for his needs. He telephoned the de-facto complainant frequently and talked to her using abusive words. It is also submitted that he is threatening the de-facto complainant stating that he will not allow the de-facto complainant to live peacefully. It is also submitted that the mobile phone numbers of the accused and the de-facto complainant is also mentioned in the complaint filed by the de-facto Crl.M.C. No.5662 of 2016 4 complainant. The de-facto complainant lodged her complaint before the Sub Inspector of Police, Kunnamkulam and Annexure-A1 FIR was registered under Section 354(A) of IPC. After investigation, Police submitted the final report and the case was taken on file as C.C. No.2917/2016 by the learned Magistrate. This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed to quash Annexure-A2 final report.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
4. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that there are two allegations in Annexure-A1 complaint against the petitioner. Those two allegations are not investigated by the Police and therefore, the offence under Section 354(A) IPC is not attracted in the facts and circumstances of the case. The Public Prosecutor submitted that these are matters of evidence and the petitioner has to raise all these contentions before the trial court at the appropriate stage. Crl.M.C. No.5662 of 2016 5
5. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 354(A) IPC. Section 354(A) IPC says about sexual harassment and punishment for sexual harassment. A man committing any of the following acts, like;
(i) physical contact and advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures, or
(ii) a demand or request for sexual favours, or
(iii) showing pornography against the will of a woman or making sexually coloured remarks are guilty for sexual harassment.
Therefore, to attract the offence, any of the above ingredients are necessary.
6. A bare perusal of Annexure-A1 would show that, two incidents are mentioned by the de-facto complainant to attract the offence under Section 354(A) IPC. The first allegation is that there is an entry in the minutes book of the committee that the de-facto complainant married 5 times and the petitioner knows about the same and she is leading an immoral life. Crl.M.C. No.5662 of 2016 6 But, to prove the same, the minutes book of the meeting is to be seized. No such minutes book is seized by the investigating officer in this case. Therefore, to prove that part of the complaint, there is no material collected by the investigating officer. The second allegation in Annexure-A1 complaint is that there is phone calls from the petitioner to the de-facto complainant making sexually coloured remarks. The phone number of the petitioner and the de-facto complainant is given in the complaint. The petitioner submitted Annexure-A10 application under the Right to Information Act, in which the 4 th question is that whether the phone call details of the accused was collected in connection with the investigation of Crime No.341/2016. As per Annexure-A11 reply it is informed to the petitioner that no such phone call details are perused.
7. In such circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that even if the entire allegations in Crl.M.C. No.5662 of 2016 7 Annexure-A1 complaint and in the final report are accepted, no materials are collected by the prosecution to prove the same. Therefore, no offence is made out based on the final report submitted by the investigating officer. In such circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is to be allowed.
Therefore, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioner in C.C. No.2917/2016 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kunnamkulam arising from Crime No.341/2016 of Kunnamkulam Police Station are quashed.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE nvj Crl.M.C. No.5662 of 2016 8 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 5662/2016 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO.341/16 OF KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT/CHARGE IN CC 2917/2016 OF JFCM COURT, KUNNAMKULAM.
ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE SUSPENSION ORDER DT.29-9-2015 AGAINST THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT FROM PLACEMENT SECURITY AND HOME NURSING OWNERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION.
ANNEXURE A4 TRUE COPY OF THE INJUNCTION ORDER IN IA 11430/15 IN OS 1621/15 IN THE FILE OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, ERNAKULAM. ANNEXURE A5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT DT.28-1- 2016.
ANNEXURE A6 REPLY ISSUED BY SI OF POLICE KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION DT.28-2- 2016 TO ANNEXURE A5.
ANNEXURE A7 TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM DT.11-6- 2016 PUBLISHED IN MALAYALA MANORAMA IN CONNECTION WITH THE ARREST OF PETITIONER.
ANNEXURE A8 TRUE COPY OF THE RTI APPEAL SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER DT.28-6-2016 BEFORE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUNNAMKULAM.
ANNEXURE A9 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE NO.17/RTIA/ECO/2016 RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUNNAMKULAM ALONG WITH COPY OF Crl.M.C. No.5662 of 2016 9 COMPLAINT DT.12-1-2016.
ANNEXURE A10 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DT.5-7- 16 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER TO SI OF POLICE, KUNNAMKULAM.
ANNEXURE A11 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY ISSUED DT.25- 7-2016 BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE A12 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE DT.16-7-2016 SUBMITTED BEFORE DYSP OF POLICE KUNNAMKULAM OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT DT.6-8-2016.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE