High CourtsSingle Bench

Anandakrishnan vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 27 June 2022 · Citation: (2022) 06 KL CK 0318

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bechu Kurian Thomas, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 354D · Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 11(iv), 12 · Information Technology Act, 2000 — Section 67B
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 4737 Of 2022
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

14 paragraphs · 443 words

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J

1.

This is an application seeking regular bail filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

2.

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.884 of 2021 of Oachira Police Station, Kollam District alleging offences under Section 354D of the Indian Penal Code, Section 12 r/w Section 11(iv) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 67B of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

3.

The prosecution case is that the petitioner stalked the minor girl aged 16 years and contacted her through social media and sent pornographic messages and demanded her nude photographs. The prosecution also alleges that petitioner committed sexual harrassment through the mobile phone and under his instigation the victim sent a photo of the upper front portion of her body to his mobile phone and thereby committed the offences alleged against him.

4.

Sri.Sameer, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that petitioner is totally innocent and has been falsely roped in the case.

5.

Smt.Nima Jacob, the learned Public Prosecutor pointed out that during  the  course  of  investigation,  Section  67B  of  the  Information Technology  Act  has  been  deleted  and  that  the  offences  under  the remaining Sections alone are now attributed against the petitioner. It was also pointed out that the petitioner was arrested on 04.06.2022 and has been in custody since then.

6.

A perusal of the case diary reveals that prima facie there are materials on record to connect the petitioner with the crime. However, since petitioner was remanded to judicial custody on 04.06.2022, I am of the view that the continued detention of the petitioner is not required in the circumstances of the case. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.

7.

In the result, this application is allowed on the following conditions:-

(i) Petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction.

(ii) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

(iii) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence or contact the victim or her family members.

(iv) Petitioner shall not commit any offence while he is on bail.

(v) Petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the Court having jurisdiction.

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.