High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 01 KL CK 0040

SR. SARITHA & ORS. vs SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE & ORS.

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 15 January 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sunil Thomas
CASE NUMBER
8585 of 2017

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

14 paragraphs · 261 words
1.

Petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos. 1 to 3 in C.P.No.22/2017 of Judicial First Class Magistrate court, Kothamangalam arising from Crime

No.26/2017 of Kothamangalam Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 370, 34 IPC and Sections 75 and 79 of Juvenile Justice

Act. It was alleged by the prosecution that the petitioners had engaged juveniles for hard labour. Accordingly, crime was registered and after

investigation final report was filed.

2.

The petitioners have approached this Court contending that the 3rd respondent who is in-charge of a local convent in Odisha had recommended

the children to do work at the institution of the petitioners herein at Kothamangalam considering the economic condition of the children.

Accordingly, they were only assisting in the running of the hostel. They were never engaged for hard labour.

3.

Crl.M.C. is laid on a premise that the disputes between the parties have been settled amicably and the juveniles have no further grievance.

Annexures II and III are the affidavits filed by the fathers of the juveniles reiterating that they have no grievance against the petitioners and

submitted that the Crl.M.C. may be allowed.

4.

The learned Public Prosecutor on instructions submitted that the disputes have been resolved and the statements of the victims have been

recorded. Having considered these facts, I feel that no purpose will be served by prosecuting the petitioners. Hence, I am inclined to invoke the

jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the entire proceedings. Accordingly, Crl.M.C. is allowed. All further proceedings in

C.P.No.22/2017 of Judicial First Class Magistrate court, Kothamangalam stand quashed.