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 · 552 wordsDr. Kauser Edappagath, J
This application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking regular bail.
The applicant is the accused in Crime No.243/2023 of Palarivattom Police Station. The offence alleged is punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of the IPC.
The prosecution case, in short, is that the applicant had sexual intercourse with the victim on different occasions during the period from 2018 to June, 2022 after giving false promise of marriage and thereby committed the offence.
I have heard Sri. John Sebastian Ralph, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri. M.P. Prasanth, the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.
The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicant with the alleged crime; hence, he is entitled to get bail. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicant, and he is not entitled to bail at this stage.
The applicant was remanded to judicial custody on 3.3.2023. The applicant and the victim were studying at Bangalore Aacharya College during 2017-2018. They fell in love. Admittedly, there were in live-in-relationship. In the FIS it is stated that the applicant and the victim stayed in the house at Bangalore for three years. The victim admitted in the FIS that they voluntarily had sex several times. The victim has no case that at the inception, the applicant had intention to cheat her. The victim has also no case that initially she consented for sex persuaded by the promise of marriage given by the applicant. Her case is that, subsequently, the applicant promised to marry her. It appears that the complaint was lodged when the victim came to know that the applicant decided to marry another woman. For all these reasons, I do not find any reason to hold that the continued detention of the applicant is required for any purpose. Hence, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. In the result, the application is allowed on the following conditions: -
(i) The applicant shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Magistrate/Court.
(ii) The applicant shall fully co-operate with the investigation.
(iii) The applicant shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m. on every Saturday until further orders. He shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required.
(iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.
(v) The applicant shall not attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.
(vi) The applicant shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.
(vii) The application, if any, for deletion/modification of the bail conditions or cancellation of bail on the grounds of violating the bail conditions shall be filed at the jurisdictional court.
