Scoble vs State Of Kerala

This Bail Application filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code was heard through Video Conference.

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1924 of 2020 of Kottiyam Police Station, Kollam District. The above case is registered against the petitioner

alleging offences punishable under Sections 7 & 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (for short 'POCSO Act'). The petitioner

was arrested on 13.11.2020 and he is in custody from that date onwards.

The prosecution case is that, on 29.8.2020 when the accused attended the house warming of the de facto complainant, the father of the de facto

complainant insisted the de facto complainant to accompany the petitioner's to his house because of his right leg is fractured. It is the case of the

victim boy that when the petitioner and the de facto complainant reached near the well of the house of the petitioner, the petitioner dragged the de

facto complainant towards the nearby well and forcefully removed his trouser and caught hold of his penis and thus the petitioner committed the

offence.

Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, the allegations against the petitioner are not correct. It is a false case foisted against the

petitioner. The learned counsel submitted that, when the petitioner filed a bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. this Court dismissed the same and

directed the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer. Subsequently, the petitioner was arrested and the bail application of the petitioner

was dismissed by the lower court as per Annexure-4 order. The learned counsel also submitted that, the petitioner is ready to abide any conditions, if

this Court grant him bail.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that, if this Court is granting bail stringent

conditions may be imposed.

After hearing both sides, I think this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. Admitted prosecution case is that, when the petitioner

sustained a fracture on his leg, he committed the alleged offences. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, a reading of FI statement will

show that, it is highly improbable. I do not want to make any observations about the merit of the case. The only offence alleged against the petitioner

is under Sections 7 & 8 of the POCSO Act. The maximum punishment that can be imposed under Section

8 of the POCSO Act is only 5 years. The petitioner is in custody from 13.11.2020. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of this case I think,

this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions.

Moreover, considering the need to follow social distancing norms inside prisons so as to avert the spread of the novel Corona Virus Pandemic, the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in Re: Contagion of COVID-19 Virus In Prisons case (Suo Motu Writ Petition(C) No.1 of 2020) and a Full Bench of this

Court in W.P(C)No.9400 of 2020 issued various salutary directions for minimizing the number of inmates inside prisons.

Moreover, it is a well accepted principle that, the bail is the rule and the jail is the exception. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Chidambaram P. v.

Directorate of Enforcement (2019 (16) SCALE 870), after considering all the earlier judgments, observed that, the basic jurisprudence relating to bail

remains the same inasmuch as the grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception so as to ensure that the accused has the opportunity of securing

fair trial.

Considering the dictum laid down in the above decision and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Bail Application is allowed

with the following directions:

The petitioner shall be released on bail on 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 jurisdictional Court;

The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required. The petitioner shall co-operate with the

investigation and shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to

dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

The petitioner shall not leave India without permission of the jurisdictional Court;

The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected;

The petitioner shall strictly abide by the various guidelines issued by the State Government and Central Government with respect to keeping of

social distancing in the wake of Covid 19 pandemic;

If any of the above conditions are violated by the petitioner, the jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in accordance to law, even though the bail is

granted by this Court.