Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court Illicit Affair Alone Cannot Make a Man Guilty of Abetting Suicide: Supreme Court Quashes Charge Under Section 306 IPC Landlord Cannot Be Punished for Slowness of Courts: Supreme Court on Bonafide Need in Eviction Suits Expect States To Enact Laws Regulating Unlicensed Money Lenders Charging Exorbitant Interest Contrary To 'Damdupat': Supreme Court Accused Who Skips Lok Adalat After Seeking It, Then Cries 'Prejudice', Cannot Claim Apprehension of Denial of Justice: Madras High Court Refuse To Transfer Case IO Cannot Act Without Prior Sanction: Gujarat High Court Grants Bail, Flags Procedural Lapse in Religious Conversion Case Electricity Board Strictly Liable For Unprotected Transformer, 7-Year-Old Cannot Be Guilty Of Contributory Negligence: Allahabad High Court POCSO Conviction Can't Stand For Offence Not Charged: Delhi High Court Member of Unlawful Assembly Cannot Escape Conviction By Claiming He Only Carried a Lathi and Struck No One: Allahabad High Court Jurisdiction Cannot Be Founded On Casual Or Incidental Facts If Not Have A Direct Nexus With The Lis: : Delhi High Court Clause Stating Disputes "Can" Be Settled By Arbitration Is Not A Binding Arbitration Agreement: Supreme Court State Cannot Plead Helplessness Against Sand Mafia; Supreme Court Warns Of Paramilitary Deployment, Complete Mining Ban In MP & Rajasthan Authority Cannot Withdraw Subsidy Citing Non-Compliance When It Ignored Repeated Requests For Inspection: Supreme Court Out-of-State SC/ST/OBC Candidates Cannot Claim Rajasthan's Reservation Benefits in NEET PG Counselling: Rajasthan High Court Supreme Court Upholds Haryana's Regularisation Of Qualified Ad Hoc Staff As 'One-Time Measure', Strikes Down Futuristic Cut-Offs

High Court Upholds Framing of Charges in Unni Mukundan’s Case: “Prima Facie Case Established,” Says Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant development, the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam has upheld the framing of charges against renowned cine actor Unni Mukundan in a case involving allegations of offenses under Sections 354 and 354-B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The court ruled that there is a prima facie case against the actor and dismissed his plea for discharge.

In the order issued by Justice K. Babu, the court stated, “The materials placed by the prosecution prima facie disclosed the existence of all the ingredients constituting the alleged offenses.” It further emphasized that at the stage of framing charges, the court is concerned with whether there is a strong suspicion that the accused has committed the offense, and the material brought on record by the prosecution is accepted as true.

The case revolves around a complaint filed by Preethi Chacko, who accused Unni Mukundan of forcefully kissing her and attempting to commit rape. The complainant alleged that she had approached the actor with a script and storylines for a Malayalam film but faced an unpleasant exchange of words, leading to the alleged incident.

Rejecting the arguments of the petitioner’s counsel, the court highlighted that the accused failed to demonstrate any patent miscarriage of justice in the proceedings. It reiterated that the power to quash charges is an exception to the rule of continuous prosecution, and trial should proceed if the allegations prima facie establish the offense.

The court further directed the trial court to proceed with the case and dispose of it expeditiously within three months. It also clarified that the accused would have the opportunity to present evidence and, if needed, apply for bail under Section 205 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

This judgment reinforces the principle that at the stage of framing charges, the court focuses on the prima facie case against the accused, without delving into the evaluation of evidence or determination of guilt. The decision sets an important precedent regarding the jurisdiction of the High Court in quashing charges and underscores the significance of allowing the trial process to unfold to establish the truth.

Unni Mukundan, a well-known cine actor in Malayalam, Tamil, and Kannada film industries, now faces trial as the case progresses in the lower court. The verdict serves as a reminder that allegations of serious offenses demand a thorough examination and adherence to due process to ensure justice for all parties involved.

Date of Decision: 23rd May 2023

UNNI MUKUNDAN VS STATE OF KERALA,

Latest Legal News