High CourtsSingle Bench

Akhil Varghese @ Manu vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 27 October 2021 · Citation: (2021) 10 KL CK 0166

HON’BLE JUDGES
Gopinath P, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 342, 354(D), 363, 376, 506(i)
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Appl. No. 7765 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

6 paragraphs · 438 words

Gopinath P., J

1.

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1734/2021 of Perumbavoor Police Station, Ernakulam District. The allegation against the petitioner is that he assaulted the victim by pretending to be in love with her and on 18.08.2020 he forcefully took her away from her house and committed rape on her at a building under construction in the locality. It is alleged that the petitioner also took photographs of the victim and the used the same to threaten her and continue the sexual assault on the victim.

2.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been in custody from 19.09.2021 and that the petitioner is an absolutely innocent of all the allegations leveled against him. It is submitted that the petitioner and the victim girl were in love and the sexual relationship between them was purely consensual.

3.

The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, would submit that the petitioner is a married man and he had pretended to be in love with the victim and had sexually abused her several times by threatening her after stating that he would reveal her nude photographs to others. It is submitted that the petitioner is accused of serious offences under Sections 363, 342, 354(D) and 376 of the Indian Penal Code. It is also submitted that it was the victim who withdrew from the relationship with the petitioner and thereafter, the petitioner continued to harass her, as a result of which, she was forced to file the complaint. It is also submitted that the petitioner is accused in five other cases, the details of which have been made available to me.

4.

Though the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that all the five cases mentioned by the learned Public Prosecutor relate to offences arising out of business relationship with his partners and that among the five some are private complaints, I must notice that there are crimes registered in the years 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020 against the petitioner. That apart the investigation of the case is only progressing. The release of the petitioner, at this stage, my result in the investigation being hampered as there is every likelihood that the petitioner will hamper the investigation and attempt to influence the victim and other witnesses in the case. This is more particularly so as the petitioner is involved in five other cases as well. Out of the five cases in Crime No.311/2020 is registered under Sections 354 and 506(i) of the IPC. Therefore, it may not be appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner.

In the result, the bail application will stand dismissed.