G.Girish, J
1. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.845/2019 of the Thrissur Town West Police Station. In the aforesaid case, the Investigating Agency has
filed a final report alleging the commission of offence under Sections 376 AB, 376(2)(f)(n) & 376(3) of the Indian PenalÂ
Code, 1860, and Section 4 read with Section 3 (b) & Section 6 read with Section 5 (l)(m)(n) of theÂ
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)
Act, 2015.
2.  The allegation against the petitioner, a person aged 69 years who retired from the University of Calicut as Section Officer, is that
he committed rape and penetrative sexual assault upon his seven year old granddaughter by pressing his fingers upon her genitalÂ
area during various occasions from 2017 to 2019. According to the petitioner, a false case has been foisted against him by his daughter, who is
the mother of the victim child, since he did not give approval for the wanton life being followed by her. It is stated that the victim child was
born in the first marriage of the petitioner’s daughter, which was dissolved under Section 10A of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869,Â
on 21.08.2017. Thereafter, the  petitioner’s daughter is said to have married another person, but the above
relationship also did not extend for more than one year. While the proceedings were pending before the Family Court, Thrissur,Â
for the divorce of the second marriage of the petitioner’s daughter, she is said to have fallen in love with another person, who later on
committed suicide. According to the petitioner, his daughter was having behavioural abnormality and she was undergoing psychiatric treatment. The
present case is said to have been foisted by the petitioner’s daughter, since she was in inimical terms with the petitioner dueÂ
to the admonition and correctional steps being  taken by him to guide his daughter to lead a disciplined life.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that at present the victim child and her mother are under theÂ
care and protection of the petitioner and his wife, and the victim’s mother, who is the daughter of the petitioner, has now realised the wrong
committed by her in preferring a false complaint against the petitioner. It is further submitted that theÂ
petitioner’s daughter and the victim child fervently want to withdraw the false complaint raised against theÂ
petitioner, as misguided by some unscrupulous persons.  In support of the above argument, the learned counsel for the
petitioner adverted to an affidavit filed by the victim’s mother on 13.12.2024 stating that she deeply regretted the
institution of this crime against the petitioner as an act of retaliation for trying to interfere with her freedom. It is further stated in the affidavit that
the victim’s mother preferred the complaint under the advice of some of her friends, and that at present, neither she, nor her daughter, wanted to
prosecute the petitioner. Thus, it is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitionerÂ
in this regard are to be quashed, since it is writ large from the above affidavit filed by the mother of the
victim that a false case has been foisted against the petitioner.
5.  The learned Public Prosecutor, per contra, submitted that the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973, cannot be invoked for the termination of the prosecution proceedings in a case like this, where there is veryÂ
serious allegation pertaining to the commission of rape and penetrative sexual assault upon a child.
6. The child who is the victim of the offence in this case is presently aged only 13 years. It is trueÂ
that her mother has filed an affidavit to the effect that the criminal prosecution against the petitioner was launched by her as an act of
retaliation, since she did not like the control exercised by the petitioner upon her free life. But, it is well-settled that in cases like this, where the
accusation pertains to rape and POCSO Act offences, the prosecution cannot be nipped in the bud invoking the powers under Section
482 Cr.P.C. stating the reason that the parents or guardian of the victim had sorted out the issue with the accused. The
accusations levelled against the petitioner are to be tested in the proceedings before the designated Court.  If the contentions
raised by the petitioner about the fabrication of false case against him has got any basis, the Trial Court could very well consider the
said aspect at the appropriate stages including the stage of hearing on framing charges. However, taking into account of
the fact that the petitioner is a senior citizen and that the victim’s mother herself has stated that there was no basis for the accusations levelled
against the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to permit the petitioner to appear through his counsel before the Trial Court, except for those occasions
where the personal presence of the petitioner is indispensable for the proper conduct of the trial.
In the result, the petition is disposed of as follows:-
(i) The Trial Court shall not insist the personal presence of the petitioner, except for those occasions where his personal
appearance is inevitable in connection with any procedure for the proper conduct of the trial.
(ii)   If the petitioner prefers to file any petition for his discharge, it shall be disposed of on meritÂ
after taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case including the stand taken by the victim’s mother about the
reasons for the registration of this crime.