Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Prasad A.A., Accused No.5 in Spl.C.C.No.5025/2019, filed a petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of proceedings for offences under Sections 363, 376, 114, 34 IPC and Sections 4, 5L, 6, 17 of the POCSO Act. The case arose from a complaint by the 2nd respondent that a 17-year-old victim went missing on 25-10-2019. The victim was traced on 27-10-2019, and her statement led to the arrest of the petitioner and others. The charge sheet alleged that the petitioner was present when the main accused (Accused No.1) committed rape on the victim, and that he facilitated the crime by providing a vehicle and being present. The petitioner argued that there was no prima facie evidence against him as he was merely present and did not participate in the sexual assault. The court examined the charge sheet and found that the victim's statement did not implicate the petitioner in the rape or kidnapping. The court held that mere presence without active participation or instigation does not constitute abetment under Section 114 IPC or common intention under Section 34 IPC. Similarly, for abetment under Section 17 POCSO Act, there must be intentional aid or instigation, which was absent. The court also noted that the petitioner was not involved in the initial kidnapping as the victim voluntarily accompanied the main accused. Consequently, the court quashed the proceedings against the petitioner for all offences except Section 363 IPC, for which the petitioner was not charged. The petition was allowed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Quashing of Proceedings - Section 482 CrPC - Inherent Powers - The High Court can quash proceedings if no prima facie case is made out against the accused, even at the stage of charge sheet. (Para 5) B) Indian Penal Code - Abetment - Section 114 IPC - Presence and Abetment - Mere presence at the scene of crime without active participation or instigation does not constitute abetment under Section 114 IPC. (Para 6) C) Indian Penal Code - Common Intention - Section 34 IPC - Common Intention - For Section 34 IPC, there must be a pre-arranged plan and active participation in furtherance of common intention; mere presence is insufficient. (Para 6) D) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Abetment - Section 17 POCSO Act - Abetment of Offence - Abetment under Section 17 requires intentional aid or instigation; mere presence without evidence of such aid does not attract the provision. (Para 6) E) Indian Penal Code - Kidnapping - Section 363 IPC - Kidnapping - The petitioner was not involved in the initial kidnapping as the victim voluntarily accompanied the main accused; no evidence of petitioner's role in kidnapping. (Para 6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the proceedings against the petitioner (Accused No.5) under Sections 363, 376, 114, 34 IPC and Sections 4, 5L, 6, 17 of POCSO Act should be quashed for lack of prima facie evidence.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The proceedings in Spl.C.C.No.5025/2019 on the file of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kodagu-Madikeri sitting at Virajpet, insofar as the petitioner is concerned, are quashed.
Law Points
- Quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC
- Prima facie case requirement for framing charges
- Abetment under Section 114 IPC
- Conspiracy under Section 34 IPC
- Age of victim under POCSO Act
