High CourtsSingle Bench

Robert vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 28 January 2022 · Citation: (2022) 01 KL CK 0221

HON’BLE JUDGES
Gopinath P, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code,1860 — Section 341, 354(A) · Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 7, 8, 9(f), 10, 11(i), 12
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
BAIL APPL. NO. 306 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

29 paragraphs · 561 words

Gopinath P, J

1.

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.3049/2021 of Neyyattinkara Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District alleging commission of offences

under Sections 341, 354(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 read with Section 7, 10 read with 9 (f), 12 read with 11 (i) of the Protection of

Children from Sexual Offences Act.

2.

The allegation against the petitioner who is stated to be running a tuition centre is that he fondled the breast of the de facto complainant who was

attending tuition centre for the purpose of tuition and thereby he committed the offences alleged against him.

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent in the matter. It is submitted that the petitioner is a 53 year

old man who has been running a tuition centre for large number of years and no similar allegations have been raised in the past. It is submitted that the

allegations are raised on the basis of some misunderstanding. It is pointed out that even going by the statement of the victim, the allegation is that the

petitioner molested her on one occasion in the month of April 2021. It is submitted that the petitioner has been in custody from 18-12-2021 and has

thus completed 42 days in custody. It is submitted that the continued detention of the petitioner is not required for the purposes of any investigation.

4.

I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor also. The learned Public Prosecutor has taken me through the statement of the victim and has pointed

out the nature of the allegations against the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner was holding a position of trust and the allegations against the

petitioner are, therefore, more serious. It is submitted that the release of the petitioner on bail may not be conducive to the prosecution, as there is

every chance that the victim may be intimidated and influenced.

5.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations against the petitioner and taking into account

the fact that he has been in custody from 18-12-2021 and also considering the fact that his continued detention may not be necessary for the purpose

of any investigation, I am of the view that the petitioner can be granted bail with sufficient conditions to ensure that the petitioner does not influence or

intimidate the minor victim.

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

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

jurisdictional Court;

(ii) The Petitioner shall report before the Investigating officer in Crime No.3049/2021 of Neyyattinkara Police Station on every Saturday at 11 a.m until filing of final

report in the aforesaid crime;

(iii) The petitioner shall not attempt to interfere with the investigation, influence or intimidate the victim or any witness in Crime No.3049/2021 of Neyyattinkara Police

Station;

(iv) 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.3049/2021 of Neyyattinkara Police Station may file an application

before the jurisdictional Court for cancellation of bail.