Kerala High Court Quashes POCSO Case Due to 8-Year Delay and Lack of Evidence; Finds Complaint a Vindictive Afterthought Post Divorce

The Kerala High Court quashed criminal proceedings against the petitioner accused of rape and offences under the POCSO Act, citing an unexplained delay of over eight years in filing the complaint, lack of medical and corroborative evidence, and contradictions in the prosecution case. The Court held that the belated complaint, filed after a series of matrimonial disputes and divorce, was clearly motivated and amounted to an abuse of the process of law.

• The case arose from Crime No. 473/2021 registered at Thadiyittaparambu Police Station, alleging that the accused raped the complainant (then a minor) on 10.08.2013 and later committed repeated sexual assaults until 2014.

• The FIR invoked Sections 363, 366, 370, 354A(1), and 376(1) IPC and Sections 4 r/w 3(a) and 8 r/w 7 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

• The petitioner contended that the complaint was a false case instituted by his estranged wife to harass him after their divorce.

• The complaint was filed in 2021—eight years after the alleged incidents—and after multiple previous litigations under Section 498A IPC and the Domestic Violence Act had been settled.

• The FIR and final report were filed maliciously by the complainant, who was his former wife, to take revenge after marital disputes and divorce.

• There was an inordinate delay of eight years in lodging the complaint without any satisfactory explanation.

• Alleged incidents were false — on one of the specified dates (30.01.2014), the accused was present at school, confirmed through attendance records.

• The complaint lacked medical and independent evidence; hence continuation of proceedings would amount to an abuse of process.

• The prosecution alleged that the accused had sexually assaulted the victim when she was a minor and later continued the relationship under the false promise of marriage.

• The victim’s silence was due to fear, emotional manipulation, and the accused’s repeated assurances of marriage.

• The delay in filing the complaint should not automatically invalidate a genuine claim of sexual assault.

Delay of Eight Years:

The Court observed that the complaint was filed in 2021 for alleged acts in 2013–14, with no reasonable explanation for the delay. Such a prolonged delay, coupled with intervening marriage and divorce, cast serious doubts on the credibility of the prosecution.

Prior Marital Relationship:

The accused and complainant had subsequently married on 08.03.2020 and divorced on 12.03.2021. Several disputes under Section 498A IPC and the Domestic Violence Act were earlier settled by Lok Adalat.

False Allegation and Contradictions:

On one alleged date of assault (30.01.2014), the accused was found to be in school, disproving the claim. The witness (CW1), who allegedly saw the incident, denied such observation in his statement under Section 164 CrPC.

Absence of Evidence:

The Court noted no medical or physical evidence, and the allegations were unsupported by contemporaneous complaints or witnesses.

Abuse of Process:

The Court found that the complaint was filed after the breakdown of marriage and appeared to be a vindictive afterthought to harass the petitioner. Continuing the trial would be an abuse of judicial process.

• The Criminal Miscellaneous Case was allowed.

• All further proceedings in S.C. No. 6 of 2022, arising from Crime No. 473/2021 of Thadiyittaparambu Police Station, were quashed.

• The Court held that the continuation of the prosecution would be an abuse of the process of law.

Citation: 2025:KER:79851

Case: XXXXXXXXXX v. State of Kerala & Ors.

Court: High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice C. Pratheep Kumar

Crl.MC No.: 4690 of 2022

Arising out of: Crime No. 473/2021 of Thadiyittaparambu Police Station, Ernakulam

Trial Court: S.C. No. 6 of 2022, Fast Track Special Court, Perumbavoor