High CourtsSingle Bench

Pradip Malik@ Raju vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 24 June 2022 · Citation: (2022) 06 KL CK 0291

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bechu Kurian Thomas, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 323, 376(1), 450, 506(ii) · Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 3(a), 4, 11(iv), 12 · Information Technology Act, 2000 — Section 67B(a)(e)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 3707 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 · 569 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.2268/2021 of Perumbavoor Police Station, which is now pending as SC.No.109/2022 on the files of the Fast Track Special Court, Perumbavoor. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 450, 323, 376(1), 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 4 r/w Section 3(a), Section 11(v) r/w Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 67B(a)(e) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

3.

Prosecution case is that the accused, who hails from Orissa criminally trespassed into the house of the victim aged 17 years and committed rape and penetrative sexual assault on her on 06.12.2021 thereby committing the offences alleged against him.

4.

Sri.Ajeesh M.Ummer, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though the petitioner hails from Orissa, he has a permanent place of residence in Kerala and is living along with his wife and four children in a rented house and that the victim was a neighbour, who hailed from West Bengal and that the allegations are totally false. It was further pointed out that the petitioner was arrested on 10.12.2021 and that the trial in the instant case had already commenced before the Fast Track Special Court, Perumbavoor wherein PWs 1 to PWs 3, including the victim, were examined on 18.06.2022. He therefore seeks regular bail.

5.

Smt.Nima Jacob, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of bail and submitted that if the petitioner is released on bail, there is every possibility of him absconding.

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 judicial custody on 10.12.2021, I am of the view that the continued detention of the petitioner is not required in the circumstances of the case, more so since the investigation is over and the final report has already been filed. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.

7.

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

(a) The petitioner shall be released on bail on his 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. One of the sureties shall necessarily be from a local place in Kerala itself.

(b) The petitioner shall co-operate with the trial of the case.

(c) The petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he attempt to tamper with the evidence.

(d) The petitioner shall not commit any similar offence while he is on bail.

(e) Petitioner shall not enter into the local limits of Perumbavoor Police Station until conclusion of the trial except for the purpose of participating in the trial or to comply with other conditions imposed in this order.

(f) Petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer once every two weeks.

(g) The petitioner shall not leave the country without the permission of the jurisdictional Court.

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.