High CourtsSingle Bench

Hansraj vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 11 November 2022 · Citation: (2022) 11 KL CK 0145

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bechu Kurian Thomas, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code. 1860 — Section 354, 354A(1)(i), 376(2)(n) · Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 5(b)(i), 5(j)(ii), 5(l), 6, 9(ii)(I), 10
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 8265 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

15 paragraphs · 477 words

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J

1.

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

2.

Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.451 of 2022 of Kannamaly Police Station, Ernakulam registered for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 354A(1)(i) and 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 apart from Section 10 r/w Section 9(ii)(I), Section 6 r/w Section 5(b)(i), Section 5(j)(ii) & Section 5(l) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

3.

The prosecution case is that, the accused committed rape on the minor victim in the month of November 2021, when she was only 17 years and thereafter she gave birth to a child on 03.09.2022 and the accused committed the offence as alleged.

4.

Sri.Rasheed  C.Nooranad,  the  learned  counsel  for  the petitioner submitted that the entire prosecution allegations are false and that the incident as alleged had not occurred. It was further submitted that, in any event, petitioner has been in custody since 17.08.2022, and therefore further detention may not be permitted.

5.

Smt.M.K.Pushpalatha, the learned Public Prosecutor, opposed the grant of bail and submitted that the allegations are serious in nature and that the victim is a minor, who became pregnant due to the rape. It was further submitted that, even though the petitioner has been in detention since 17.08.2022, if the petitioner is released on bail, there is every possibility of him influencing and intimidating the victim and other witnesses.

6.

The accused is an employee of the Indian Navy. He was a neighbour of the victim too. Petitioner was arrested on 17.08.2022 and has been in custody since then. Taking note of the filing of the final report and the period of detention already undergone, I am of the view that continued detention of the petitioner is not essential, however, strict conditions ought to be imposed.

7.

Accordingly, I allow this application is allowed on the following conditions:-

(a) Petitioner shall be released on bail on him 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) Petitioner  shall  co-operate  with  the  trial  of  the case.

(c) Petitioner shall not enter the jurisdictional limits of Kannamaly Police Station, till the conclusion of trial.

(d) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he attempt to tamper with the evidence.

(e) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is on bail.

(f) Petitioner shall not leave the country without the permission of the jurisdictional Court.

8.

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.