High CourtsSingle Bench

Shivajith vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 22 June 2022 · Citation: (2022) 06 KL CK 0254

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bechu Kurian Thomas, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 354, 354D · Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 — Section 7, 8, 11(iv), 12
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 4555 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

14 paragraphs · 404 words

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J

1.

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

2.

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.314 of 2022 of Chathannoor Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 354 and 354D of the Indian Penal Code 1860 and also under Section 8 r/w Sec.7 and Sec.12 r/w 11(iv) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012.

3.

The prosecution case is that with an intention to outrage the modesty of the minor victim aged 16 years, petitioner contacted her through mobile phone and continuously tortured her through such calls. Thereafter, the victim attempted to commit suicide and thus, the petitioner committed the offences alleged against him.

4.

Sri.P.Anoop, the learned counsel for the petitioner, contended that already more than a month has elapsed since the petitioner was arrested and that he has no connection with the crime. According to  the  learned  counsel, petitioner  is  totally  innocent  and  the crime is registered falsely.

5.

Smt.Nima Jacob, the learned Public Prosecutor, vehemently opposed the grant of regular bail and submitted that the offences committed by the petitioner are grave in nature.

6.

A perusal of the case diary reveals that prima facie there are materials on record to connect the petitioner with the crime. However, I am of the view that the continued detention of the petitioner is not required in the circumstances of the case. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.

7.

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

(i)Petitioner shall be released on bail on his 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 witnesse; nor shall he tamper with the evidence or contact the victim or their family members;

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

(v) The applicant 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.