IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 14TH OCTOBER 2011 / 22ND ASWINA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 3342 of 2011 -------------------------------- LP.5/2006 of ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, KOTTARAKKARA .................... PETITIONER/3rd ACCUSED: SAKKEER HUSSAIN, S/O ABDUL MAJEED, THEKKINKATTIL VEEDU, CHIRAVOOR, CHITHARA, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.SAJU.S.A RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT: 1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLI PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM – 682 031. 2. SAJEENA, D/O SUBAIDA BEEVI, KIZHAKKUMKARA VEEDU, CHIRAVOOR, CHITHARA, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM – 691 559. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT,REMA FOR R1 ADV. SRI.P.K.MOHANAN(PALAKKAD) FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN CRMC 3342/2011 ANNEXURE-1 TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET DT. 31.3.2001 ANNEXURE-2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT. 30.3.07 IN SC 400/02 ANNEXURE-3 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT DT. 6.9.2011 /TRUE COPY/ N.K.Balakrishnan, J. ------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3342 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of October, 2011 ORDER Petitioner is the third accused in Crime No.93/1998 of Kadakkal Police Station. The crime was registered against the petitioner and other accused alleging commission of offence under Section 376(2)(g) of Indian Penal Code. After the charge sheet was filed, the case was committed to the Court of Session, where, it was numbered as S.C.No.400/2002. Petitioner was absconding and hence, the case against him was split up and refiled as L.P.No.5/2006. Even now, petitioner is absconding. He did not appear before the court at any point of time. 2. It is submitted by the petitioner that the matter has been settled. Defacto complainant also submits that the matter has been settled. It is not a case where the proceedings can be allowed to be quashed since it is not an offence purely personal in nature. It is a case of gang rape which involves public morality and public policy and as such court cannot allow quashment of the case which is even now pending before the learned CRMC 3342/2011 2 Magistrate in the long pending register. It is argued on behalf of the defacto complainant that unless the case is allowed to be quashed, it will cause hardship to her. In view of the fact that the offence alleged is gang rap, I am not inclined to quash the proceedings against the petitioner. Hence, this petition is dismissed. (N.K.Balakrishnan, Judge) tkv