Emmanuel K.B vs State Of Kerala

A. Badharudeen, J.

This is an application for regular bail filed by the sole accused in Crime No.96 of 2024 of Erattupettah Police Station, under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor in detail. Perused the case diary and report of the Investigating Officer placed by the learned Public Prosecutor.

In this case the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 450, 354, 354A(1)(i), 354B, 376, 376(2) (n), 376(3) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4(2) r/w 3(a), 6 r/w 5(l), 8 r/w 7, 12 r/w 11(iv) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (`POCSO Act’ for short). The specific allegation is that the accused herein with intention to commit aggravated sexual assault against the minor victim, aged 15 years one month and 9 days contacted the victim through telephone continuously. Thereafter, the accused trespassed upon the rental house where the victim was staying and subjected her to rape and aggravated sexual assault.

While pressing for regular bail to the petitioner, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and the victim through telephone calls fell in love with him and when the petitioner rejected the same, false case has been lodged against him. It is also pointed out that going by the F.I.S as well as the 164 statement given by the victim, no aggravated form of sexual assault could be noticed. Therefore, highlighting the custody of the petitioner from 29.01.2024, the learned counsel for the petitioner pressed for regular bail.

Whereas the learned Public Prosecutor strongly opposed grant of bail highlighting the seriousness of the offences and also stated that there is aggravated sexual assault justifying the offences including, offences under Section 376(2)(n) and 376(3) of IPC. In such a case, the accused doesn’t deserve bail. It is also submitted that as per the statements of the victim, overt acts on the pretext of love could be seen.

On perusal of the prosecution records, trespass of the accused at the rental house of the defacto complainant, where the victim was staying, and subjecting her to rape could be noticed. The absolute innocence of the petitioner, urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner, canvassed for regular bail cannot be justified in a case of serious allegations.

Therefore, the petitioner doesn’t deserve bail. Accordingly, the bail application stands dismissed.