High CourtsSingle Bench

Akhil Dev S vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 9 November 2021 · Citation: (2021) 11 KL CK 0047

HON’BLE JUDGES
Gopinath P, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 308, 323, 324, 342, 354, 354B, 376, 376(2)(n), 449, 498A, 506(i) · Arms Act, — Section 27 · Information Technology Act, 2000 — Section 66E
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Appl. No. 8347 Of 2021
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 704 words

Gopinath P, J

1.

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.588/2021 of Palarivattam police station alleging commission of offences under Sections 324, 342, 354, 354B, 376, 376(2)(n) and 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66E of the Information Technology Act.

2.

The allegation against the petitioner is that, on 03.10.2019, the accused brought the de facto complainant to his rented house with the intention of outraging her modesty and committed rape on her and also took her photographs. It is also alleged that thereafter, by blackmailing the de facto complainant stating that her photographs will be published on social media, the petitioner/accused committed rape on the de facto complainant and further that on 21.12.2019, the petitioner forcefully married the de facto complainant.

3.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent of the allegations levelled against him. He submits with reference to the Annexures A1 and A2 that the petitioner and the de facto complainant were married and that their marriage was solemnised on 21.12.2019. He submits that the allegations raised by the de facto complainant against the petitioner are completely untrue and makes reference to the documents produced along with Crl.M.A. No.1 of 2021 in this regard.

4.

Learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, would submit that the allegations against the petitioner are very serious and that Annexures A1 to A3 do not establish that a valid marriage has taken place between the petitioner and the de facto complainant. It is submitted that the petitioner and the de facto complainant belong to different religions and a proper marriage could have been solemnised only following the provisions of the Special Marriage Act which admittedly not been done in this case. It is also pointed out that the petitioner is accused in two other cases. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is quick to point out that Crime No.1676/2018 of Palarivattam police station is regarding allegations of commission of offences under Sections 323, 324, 506(i), 308, 449 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act and arose in a course of his employment as a managing staff of a security service provider. As regards Crime No.547/2021 of Aluva East police station, it is submitted that the allegations arose as a result of disputes between the business partners regarding running of a business. It is submitted that there are no allegations similar to the allegations raised in Crime No.588/2021 of Palarivattam police station against the petitioner.

5.

Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the petitioner has been in custody from 19.09.2021 and also taking into consideration the fact that further custodial interrogation in the matter is not required for completing the investigation in Crime No.588/2021 of Palarivattam police station, I am of the opinion that the petitioner can be released on bail subject to strict conditions. Accordingly, this application is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioner shall execute bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

(ii) Petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No. 588/2021 of Palarivattam Police station on every Saturday at 11 am until further orders;

(iii) The petitioner shall not attempt to interfere with the investigation, influence or intimidate the de facto complainant or any witness in Crime No.588/2021 of Palarivattom police station;

(iv) The petitioner shall not enter the local limits of the Palarivattom police station where the de facto complainant is residing except for the purpose of complying with condition No..(ii) above;

(v) The petitioner shall surrender his passport before the jurisdictional court. If the petitioner does not have a passport, he shall execute an affidavit to that effect and file the same before the said court within seven days of release on bail;

(vi) The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No.588/2021 of Palarivattom police station may file an application before the jurisdictional court, for cancellation of bail.