High CourtsSingle Bench

Suresh vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 10 August 2022 · Citation: (2022) 08 KL CK 0085

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bechu Kurian Thomas, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 354, 376(2)(f), 376(3) · Protection of Children from Sexuual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 3(b), 4(2), 5(n), 6, 7, 8
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 5441 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

16 paragraphs · 438 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.193/2022, of the Kodanad Police Station, Ernakulam, alleging offences under Sections 354 and 376(2)(f) r/w Section 376(3) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Section 4(2) r/w Section 3(b), Section 5(n) r/w Sections 6, 7 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexuual Offences Act, 2012.

3.

The prosecution case is that on 20.02.2022, the petitioner, who is the uncle of the victim, inserted his finger into her vagina and pressed her breast and thereby, committed the offences alleged against him.

4.

Shri.Ajeesh M. Ummer, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the entire prosecution case is false and that the incident, as alleged, had never occurred. It was further pointed out that since the petitioner was arrested on 28.03.2022, the continued detention of the petitioner is not warranted.

5.

Shri. N.C.Mohanan, the learned counsel for the victim contended that the petitioner had committed a serious offence and that being the uncle of the victim, there is every possibility of threat and intimidation.

6.

Smt.M.K.Pushpalatha, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of bail and contended that the victim, being only 14 years in age and related to the petitioner, releasing him on bail would cause prejudice.

7.

Having regard to the fact that the petitioner was arrested on 28.03.2022 and that final report has already been filed and considering the nature of circumstances, I am of the view that the continued detention of the petitioner is not warranted.

8.

In the result, this application is allowed 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 co-operate with the trial of the case.

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

(d) Petitioner shall not enter into the jurisdictional limits of the Kodanad Police Station, until conclusion of the trial.

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

(f) Petitioner shall not leave the country without the permission of the jurisdictional Court.

9.

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.