Trivial Nature Of Offence, Lack Of Mens Rea, Reformed Growth Of Accused Are Positive Factors For Withdrawing Prosecution: Kerala HC

The High Court was considering a revision filed at the instance of the State. The challenge in this revision was to the order passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate.

The Single-Judge Bench of Justice K.Babu said, “It is pertinent to note that there is nothing to show that the accused had the necessary mens rea for the commission of the offences alleged. The reformed growth of the accused is reflected in the fact that most of them have become dedicated social workers.”

The petitioner was represented by the State Public Prosecutor.

The case as set up by the prosecution was that four college students, in furtherance of their common intention, committed criminal trespass by entering into the compound of the Treasury office at Kattakkada and destroying the window glasses of the Treasury building by pelting stone, causing a loss of Rs 250 to the Government. They were alleged to have committed the offences punishable under Section 447 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(2)(c) of the PDPP Act, 1984.

The Assistant Public Prosecutor filed an application under Section 321 of the Cr.P.C. seeking withdrawal of the prosecution case. The Magistrate dismissed the application, holding that the Assistant Public Prosecutor had not applied his mind and that he had filed the petition only in obedience to the orders of the government. The Public Prosecutor submitted that on the relevant date, the students were leading a procession in protest of the death of a student who committed suicide, for the reason that she was denied bank loan for higher education. The local people obstructed the procession. A scuffle occurred at the scene of occurrence. Some pelted stones towards the Treasury building, which resulted in a minor damage to the window of the building.

The Bench noted that some of the circumstances which were relied upon by the prosecution were that the lack of evidence to specifically pinpoint the role of each accused in the commission of the offences, the meager loss of Rs 250 and the fact that the accused have had no criminal antecedents.

“The idea of public interest is a protean one. It is certainly not static but rather evolves over time and gains its content from the context in which it is used”, the Bench said.

Considering the fact that the protest movement of the students, led by the accused, was for a justified cause, the Bench opined that the students only intended to sit in a dharna before the Treasury building. However, local people interfered and prevented them.

It was also noticed by the Bench that the criminal case launched by the police in 2004 is still pending. In 2008, the Government decided to withdraw the prosecution. The public prosecutor submitted that the accused have become responsible citizens and most of them are political leaders or social workers.

Considering such factual and legal aspects, the Bench held, “In my view, withdrawal of the prosecution will benefit the society, the community or the public as a whole. It will also help maintain an ongoing social order. It will only serve the public interest.”

“The trivial nature of the offence, the lack of mensrea on the part of the accused in the commission of the offence and the reformed growth of the accused, transforming himself into as dedicated social worker are some of the positive factors the Court can consider for granting consent to withdraw prosecution”, the Bench further added.

Thus, withdrawing the complaint case, the Bench discharged the accused in respect of the alleged offences.

Cause Title: State of Kerala vs. Sreenath [Neutral Citation: 2024:KER:74890]

Appearance:

Petitioner: State Public Prosecutor

Click here to read/download Order: