High CourtsSingle Bench

Pregmesh. M. P vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 21 January 2022 · Citation: (2022) 01 KL CK 0173

HON’BLE JUDGES
Gopinath P, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code,1860 — Section 323, 376(2)(n)
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 46 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

37 paragraphs · 710 words

Gopinath P., J

1.

This is an application for regular bail.

2.

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.776 of 2021 of Guruvayoor Police Station, Thrissur District, alleging commission of offences under

Sections 376(2)(n) and 323 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

The allegation against the petitioner is that he contacted the de-facto complainant through a matrimonial website and on the pretext that his divorce

proceedings are ongoing, he promised the de-facto complainant that he would marry the de-facto complainant and forced her to have sexual

relationships with him and thereafter withdrew from the promise of marriage.

4.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the relationship between the petitioner and the de-facto complainant was purely

consensual. While it is admitted that the petitioner had contacted the de-facto complainant through a matrimonial website, at a time when his divorce

proceedings were progressing, following counseling at the Family Court, Kannur, the petitioner and his wife have resolved their differences and they

started living together. It is submitted that the petitioner had every intention of marrying the de-facto complainant and could not proceed with the

proposal only on account of the fact that the petitioner and his present wife had resolved their disputes following counseling at the Family Court,

Kannur. Copy of the order in O.P.No.1202 of 2019 on the file of the Family Court, Kannur is placed before me. It is submitted that any relationship

between the petitioner and the de-facto complainant was purely consensual and there was no element of rape. It is also submitted that the promise to

marry was not false at the the inception.

5.

The learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the de-facto complainant would vehemently oppose the grant of bail. It is

submitted that the petitioner had cheated the de-facto complainant and had forced her into a sexual relationship on the premise that the petitioner

would marry her as soon as he obtains divorce from his present wife. It is submitted that the de-facto complainant was not at all aware that the issues

between the petitioner and his wife had been settled. It is submitted that the petitioner had even obtained money from the de-facto complainant on the

premise that the money was required for conduct of the proceedings before the Family Court. It is submitted that even after the petitioner had settled

all issues with his wife, he was threatening the de-facto complainant stating that he has her intimate photographs and that he would reveal the same on

social media unless the de-facto complainant were to agree to his demand for further sexual relationships. It is submitted that such a person is not

entitled to bail.

6.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering that the petitioner has been in custody from 18.12.2021 and since the

further custody of the petitioner may not be necessary for a proper investigation into Crime No.776 of 2021, I am of the opinion that the petitioner can

be granted bail subject to strict conditions to ensure that he does not threaten or intimidate the de-facto complainant in any manner.

7.

In the result, this bail application is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions:

(1) The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the

Jurisdictional Court;

(2) Petitioner shall report before the investigating officer in Crime No.776 of 2021 of Guruvayoor Police Station, Thrissur District, on every Saturday at 11.00AM till the

filing of the final report;

(3) The petitioner shall not contact the de-facto complainant or intimidate or influence the de-facto complainant or any witness in Crime No.776 of 2021 of Guruvayoor

Police Station, Thrissur District;

(4) The petitioner shall not enter Thrissur District, except for complying with condition No.(2) above till the filing of the final report;

(5) The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No.776 of 2021 of Guruvayoor Police Station, Thrissur District or the

de-facto complainant may approach this Court for cancellation of bail.