AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Application for regular bail.
The petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No. 1298 of 2020 of Sreekaryam Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections
406, 420, 511, 376 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.
The petitioner has been in custody from 29.12.2020.
The prosecution case is that the 1st accused was working as an aid to the father of the defacto complainant, who is a lawyer by profession, and he
was residing along with the grandmother of the defacto complainant at her residence. The father of the defacto complainant was laid up. The 1st
accused was helping him and he was even working as a driver. While so, the 2nd accused, who is functioning as a Poojari in a temple, made her to
believe that she had some problem like Gandharvabhadha and to get rid of the same he is ready to conduct certain poojas in the temple. Believing his
words, she consented to conduct the pooja. Thereafter, he had sent certain articles as if it is 'prasadam', to her through the 1st accused and at the time
of handing over the prasadam, the 1st accused, at the instigation of this petitioner, sexually abused her. He had even attempted to commit rape on her
at the instigation of this petitioner and thereby both of them have committed the alleged offences.
According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is totally innocent of the allegations levelled against him. Of course, the 1st
accused has approached him to conduct certain poojas for the defacto complainant as instructed by her father and he has collected the prasadam from
the temple and handed over to the defacto complainant. But the petitioner never instructed the 1st accused to abuse her sexually as alleged by the
prosecution. He had never shared any common intention with the 1st accused, but still he is in jail. Hence, this application to release him on bail.
This application is vehemently opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor. It is also submitted that the investigation of the case is only in progress
and if the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, definitely he will tamper with the evidence as he is well connected and is capable of influencing
the witnesses to the prosecution.
A perusal of the CD file would reveal that the nature of the offences alleged against this petitioner as well the 1st accused are very grave and
serious. The defacto complainant who is facing so much problems in the family because of the misfortune faced by her father who is a lawyer has
instigated this petitioner as well the 1st accused to exploit the present pathetic condition of the family, they together have committed the alleged
offences. As there is a strong prima facie case against this petitioner as well the 1st accused, at this stage it is not possible to believe that the
prosecution version is not true and this petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case by someone because of the enmity towards him. As the
investigation is only in the preliminary stage, granting of bail will give an opportunity to the petitioner to influence or terrorize the witnesses using his
power and a fair investigation may become difficult. The active role played by this petitioner to commit the alleged offences is prima facie revealed
from the CD file. So, at this stage, if the petitioner is released on bail, it would tamper the progress of an effective investigation. Hence, I am not
inclined to allow this application.
Dismissed.