High CourtsSingle Bench

Mohammed Irshad vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 28 September 2022 · Citation: (2022) 09 KL CK 0154

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bechu Kurian Thomas, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 174, 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 305, 354, 354A, 363, 376(3) · Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 3, 4, 7, 8
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No.7343 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 · 509 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.283/2022 of Adhur Police Station, Kasaragod alleging offences punishable under Sections 354, 354A, 363, 376(3) and 305 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 apart from Section 7 r/w Section 8, Section 3 r/w Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

3.

According to the prosecution, on the basis of an information received about the suicide committed by a minor girl aged 15 years, a crime was registered under Section 174 of the Cr.P.C. However, during investigation, it was revealed that the accused had kidnapped and sexually exploited the victim and when the victim realized that the accused had another affair with another girl, she committed suicide. Further investigation also revealed that the accused had committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim and thereby committed the offences alleged.

4.

Sri.C.C.Anoop along with Sri.R.Anas Muhammed Shamnad, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the prosecution allegations are false and also that the allegations are nothing but figments of imagination of the Investigating Officer. It was further submitted that the petitioner is a young man of 21 years who has been in detention from 05.07.2022. The learned counsel also pointed out that petitioner is willing to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court.

5.

Sri.Vipin Narayan, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of bail and contended that investigation has revealed the complicity of the petitioner and that despite him being young in age, releasing him on bail would prejudice the investigation. It was also pointed out that the final report has not yet been filed, though the investigation has reached the final stages.

6.

I have considered the rival contentions and have perused the records including the postmortem certificate. Considering the nature of allegations, though the crime alleged against the petitioner is serious in nature, having regard to the period of detention already undergone, I am of the view that the petitioner can be released on bail, especially since the investigation has reached its final stages.

7.

Accordingly, I allow this application 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 appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

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

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

(e) 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.