High CourtsSingle Bench

Moosa vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 20 October 2022 · Citation: (2022) 10 KL CK 0185

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bechu Kurian Thomas, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 342, 363, 370(4), 377 · Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012 — Section 3(a)(c), 4, 11(vi), 12
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 8055 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

16 paragraphs · 447 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.271/2022 of Vellayil Police Station, Kozhikode District. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 342, 370(4), 377, 363 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sections 4 read with Section 3(a)(c), Section 12 read with Section 11(vi) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act,2012.

3.

According to the prosecution, between 01.08.2022 and 30.08.2022, the accused kidnapped the minor boy aged 14 years and after confining him in a room, performed oral sex on the boy and also committed penetrative sexual assault and thereby committed the offences alleged.

4.

Sri.T.G.Rajendran learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the entire prosecution allegations are false and the incident as alleged had never occurred. It was further submitted that petitioner was arrested on 22.07.2022 and has been in custody since then. It was also submitted that the final report has been filed and therefore, the continued detention of the petitioner would not serve any purpose.

5.

Smt.M.K.Pushpalatha , learned Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of bail and contended that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature and and even though the final report has been filed, considering the gravity of offences, petitioner ought not to be released on bail.

6.

I have considered the rival contentions.

7.

Considering the period of detention already undergone by the petitioner and the filing of final report apart from the age of the accused, I am of the view that the continued detention is not essential and the petitioner can be released on bail.

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

(a) Petitioner shall be released on bail on him executing 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 into the jurisdictional limits of Thrikodithanam 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 or contact the victim.

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

(f) 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.