Sathyan vs State Of Kerala

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J

This is an application for regular bail filed under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Petitioner is the third accused in Crime No. 793 of 2022 of Guruvayoor Temple Police Station, Thrissur District alleging offences punishable under Sections 376, 120-B and 107 read with Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

According to the prosecution, on 10.10.2020 and on 15.12.2020 the 1st accused committed rape on the defacto complainant at a guest house at Guruvayoor. The 2nd and 3rd accused are alleged to have made the defacto complainant believe that they will solve the issues with the 1st accused and on the basis of the directions of the 2nd accused, the victim was taken by the 3rd accused to their house pursuant to a conspiracy, and taken to the guest house where the 1st accused committed the rape and thus the accused together committed the offences alleged.

Sri. Rajit, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, petitioner has no role in the alleged offence of rape. According to the learned counsel, the only act committed by the petitioner, even according to the prosecution is that, he drove the vehicle carrying the victim and the 1st accused to the guest house where the alleged rape was committed. The learned counsel submitted that petitioner is totally innocent and he was arrested on 02.11.2022 and has been in custody since then and that further detention is not essential.

Sri. Noushad K.A, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of bail and contended that, the prosecution allegations are serious in nature and requires custodial interrogation. According to the learned Public Prosecutor, the accused had together, conspired to commit the offences alleged and therefore, releasing the petitioner on bail at this juncture, when the investigation is still continuing will cause prejudice to the investigation.

I have considered the rival contentions and also perused the statement of the victim.

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 02.11.2022, I am of the view that the continued detention of the petitioner is not required. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.

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

(i) 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.

(ii) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required;

(iii) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence.

(iv) Petitioner shall not commit any offence while he is on bail.

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

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.