High CourtsSingle Bench

Venugopalan. A.M vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 18 November 2022 · Citation: (2022) 11 KL CK 0219

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) · Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 7, 8, 9(l), 9(m), 10
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 8874 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

13 paragraphs · 388 words

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J

1.

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

2.

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.838 of 2022 of Medical College Police Station, Kozhikode registered for the offences punishable under Sections 354A(1)(i) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and also under Sections 7, 8, 9(l) (m) & Section 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

3.

The prosecution case is that, the accused, who is an auto-rickshaw driver, had sexually abused the victim by touching on her thighs, chest and also on her private parts and thereby committed the offences alleged.

4.

Sri.Sunil Kumar.M., the learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the prosecution allegations are false and that the incident as alleged had never occurred. It was further submitted that, in any event, petitioner has been in custody since 19.10.2022, and therefore further detention ought not be permitted.

5.

Sri.Noushad K.A., the learned Public Prosecutor, opposed the grant of bail and submitted that the allegations are serious in nature, which requires custodial interrogation.

6.

A perusal of the case diary reveals that prima facie there are materials on record to connect the petitioner with the crime. However, since petitioner was remanded to judicial custody on 19.10.2022, 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:-

(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.

8.

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.