High CourtsSingle Bench

Nishad vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 3 August 2022 · Citation: (2022) 08 KL CK 0033

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bechu Kurian Thomas, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 354, 354(a)(1)(III) · Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 7, 8, 9(l), 10, 11(v), 12, 21
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 5967 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 · 464 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 1st accused in Crime No.421 of 2022 of Adhur Police Station, Kasaragod registered for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 354(a)(1)(III) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and also under Sections 8, 7, 12, 11(V), 10, 9(l), 21 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

3.

The prosecution case is that, the petitioner, who is the paramour of the victim's mother, during the period from 04.04.2022 till 07.04.2022 sexually assaulted the minor victim, aged only 14 years, by catching hold of her breast and abdomen and thereby committed the offences alleged.

4.

Sri.Kalahari Chandra Babu S., the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the prosecution case is totally false and that the incident as alleged had never occurred. He further submitted that false allegations are raised against the petitioner at the behest of the father of the victim, who was deserted by the mother of the victim. He further pointed out that petitioner was arrested on 14.06.2022 and has been in judicial custody since then.

5.

Smt.M.K.Pushpalatha, the learned Public Prosecutor, opposed the grant of bail and submitted that allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature and that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary. It was further submitted that releasing the petitioner on bail would be a threat to the victim.

6.

A perusal of the case diary reveals that prima facie there are materials on record to connect the petitioner with the crime. However, since petitioner was remanded to custody on 14.06.2022, I am of the view that the continued detention of the petitioner is not required in the circumstances of the case. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.

7.

In the result, 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 appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

(c) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence or contact the victim or his/her family members.

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

(e) Petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the Court having jurisdiction.

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.