High CourtsSingle Bench

Sarath Gopi vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 21 March 2022 · Citation: (2022) 03 KL CK 0164

HON’BLE JUDGES
Gopinath P, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 109, 114, 370, 376, 376D, 377, 506(1)
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No.2201 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

12 paragraphs · 493 words

Gopinath P., J

1.

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.141/2022 of Alappuzha North Police Station, Alappuzha District alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 109, 114, 506(1), 370, 376, 376D and 377 of the Indian Penal Code.

2.

The allegation against the petitioner is that at the instance of the first accused, who is none other than the husband of the victim, the petitioner had committed rape on the victim and also forced her have unnatural sex with him and thereby he committed the offences alleged against him. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that any relationship between the petitioner and the victim was purely consensual and there was no element of any rape as alleged. It is submitted that as per the instructions received by him, four other has been registered at the instance of the victim against different persons, where again husband of the victim is the first accused. It is submitted that the petitioner had been in custody for 72 days and his continued detention is not necessary for the purposes of any investigation.

3.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the grant of bail. The circumstances of the case appearing on the record have been pointed out. It is submitted that the contents of the first information statement of the victim and the investigation conducted thus far reveals that the allegations against the petitioner are true. It is submitted that earlier also the victim had filed a complaint against her husband indicating that such offences were being committed and despite a Police warning the first accused in the case continued to indulge in similar activities.

4.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations and considering the fact that the petitioner has been in custody for 72 days, I am of the opinion that the petitioner can be granted bail subject to conditions as his continued detention may not be necessary for the purposes of any investigation.

5.

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.141/2022 of Alappuzha North Police Station as and when called upon to do so;

(iii) The petitioner shall not attempt to interfere with the investigation, influence or intimidate any witness in Crime No.141/2022 of Alappuzha North Police Station;

(iv) The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail;

(v) The petitioner shall not enter the Karukachal Police Station limits until further orders.

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the Investigating officer in Crime No.141/2022 of Alappuzha North Police Station may file an application before the jurisdictional Court for cancellation of bail.