Aravind@ Mittu vs State Of Kerala

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J

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

Petitioners are accused Nos. 3 and 5 in Crime No.1395 of 2020 of Poojappura Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District. The offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Sections 363, 366, 341, 506 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 and Section 3 r/w Section 4, Section 16 r/w Section 17, Section 19(1)b r/w Section 21 of the Protection Of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 apart from Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.

According to the prosecution, between 31-07-2020 and 04-08-2020, 1st accused kidnapped a minor victim from the guardianship of her parents and committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault on her while the other accused gave assistance and wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant and thereby committed the offences alleged.

Even though petitioners were arrested and subsequently enlarged on bail on 08-09-2020, it was noticed that they had committed several crimes thereafter, and thus violated the conditions for grant of bail. Hence by order dated 18-06-2022 in C.M.P.No.941/2022 and C.M.P.No.942/2022, the bail granted to the petitioners were canceled. The 1st petitioner was thereafter arrested on 18-06-2022 while the 2nd petitioner surrendered before the Court on 26-07-2022 and both of them have been in custody since then.

Sri.G.Ranju Mohan, the learned counsel for the petitioners contended that petitioners have been falsely arrayed as accused in the crime, and that during the trial of the said case, the victim could not even identify the petitioners. It was further submitted that the allegation that petitioners had committed various other offences after being enlarged on bail in the present case, are creations of the police and others inimical to the petitioners and that the continued detention ought not to be permitted, especially in the light of the deposition of the victim in the instant case.

Sri. Noushad K.A., the learned Public Persecutor opposed the grant of bail and contended that petitioners are habitual offenders. It was submitted that proceedings under Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 have been initiated as against petitioner No.1 and he is already undergoing detention under the provisions of the said statute. It was further submitted that, if the petitioners are released on bail there is every chance that they may cause prejudice to be prosecution case, especially since the trial is on going with the next posting on 16-09-2022.

I have considered the rival contentions and I have also gone through the deposition of the victim in S.C.No. 6/2022 on the files of the Additional Sessions Court Protection Of Children from Sexual Offenses Thiruvananthapuram.

Taking note of the aforesaid factors and also the nature of the allegations including the period of detention undergone by the petitioners, I am of the view that continued detention of the petitioners is not essential.

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

(a) Petitioners shall be released on bail on them 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.

(b) Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

(c) Petitioners shall not contact the victim or other witnesses until conclusion of the trial.

(d) Petitioners shall not commit any similar offences while they are on bail.

(e) Petitioners 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.