High CourtsSingle Bench

Soul Vijay vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 24 August 2022 · Citation: (2022) 08 KL CK 0241

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bechu Kurian Thomas, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 354A(1)(i), 376 · Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 3(a), 4, 7, 8, 11(iv), 12
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 6254 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 · 532 words

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J

1.

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

2.

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1168/2021 of Koothattukulam Police station alleging offences under Sections 450, 354A(1)(i) and Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 apart from Section 8 r/w Section 7, Section 4 r/w Section 3(a) and Section 12 r/w Section 11(iv) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

3.

According to the prosecution, the accused committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault on the victim, aged 15 years in February, 2021 and thereby committed the offences alleged. For the said crime, petitioner was arrested on 10.10.2021 and was released on bail on 17.12.2021. However, subsequently, violating the conditions of bail, he committed sexual assault on the same victim for which Crime No.227/2022 of Ramamangalam Police Station was registered. Thereafter, on 10.05.2022, the Sessions Court, Muvattupuzha cancelled the bail granted to the petitioner in Crime No.1168/2021 of Koothattukulam Police station.

4.

Sri. Ajith George, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the allegation of flouting of bail conditions is false and that there was no occasion for the petitioner to violate any of the conditions. It was further submitted that Crime No.227/2022 is a false case initiated at the behest of the parents of the victim, solely for the purpose of cancelling the bail granted to the petitioner. It was also pointed out that since petitioner has been in custody from 01.06.2022, the continued detention ought not be permitted as he is willing to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court.

5.

Sri.Noushad K.A., the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of bail and contended that petitioner had, in defiance of the conditions imposed in the bail granted in this case, committed sexual assault on the victim and therefore he is not entitled for any leniency .

6.

The petitioner is aged 22 years and is alleged to have committed a serious offence against a girl, aged 15 years. Though petitioner had apparently violated the conditions of bail imposed in this case, considering the fact that he has been in custody from 01.06.2022, I am of the view that continued detention of the petitioner is not required.

7.

Accordingly, I allow this bail application on the following conditions :-

(a) 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.

(b) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

(c) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence or contact the victim or her family members.

(d) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is on bail.

(e) 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, not with standing the bail having been granted by this Court.