AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Shircy V, J
The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.22/2021 of Rajakkadu Police Station, Idukki District registered for the offences punishable under Section
354 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 7 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. Apprehending arrest in connection
with the said crime this application has been filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The prosecution allegation is that on 31.01.2021 the petitioner had committed sexual assault on a minor child, aged 16 years by holding on her body
with sexual intent and thereby committed the aforesaid offences.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well the learned Public Prosecutor.
According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the survivor is the daughter of the petitioner's brother-in-law and they are residing nearby. He
has noted her sending unnecessary messages frequently by using her mobile phone. Though on an earlier occasion he had given warning to her, she
continued with her habit. As she is a minor child using social media frequently it was objected by him for her safety. On 31.01.2021, when he saw her
sending messages he asked her to hand over the mobile to him but she refused the same and then he managed to obtain it from her. Then she
snatched away the same from him and on the next day filed a false complaint against this petitioner alleging very serious offences of sexual assault.
But he is totally innocent of the allegations levelled against him. Still he apprehends arrest and so he was compelled to approach this Court with this
application.
According to the learned Public Prosecutor the allegations levelled against him though a close relative is very serious in nature. The petitioner is
residing close to her residence and he is alone in his house as his wife is employed abroad. The place of occurrence is the bed room of the victim
child. As the investigation is only at the preliminary stage, granting of pre-arrest bail will hamper the smooth progress of investigation. Hence it is
opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor.
The defacto complainant is a minor child aged 16 years. It is a fact that they are close relatives and residing nearby, but the allegations levelled against
this petitioner is one of sexual assault raised by a minor child against a man aged 45 years, I find it difficult on verifying the materials on record that his
attempt was only to seize the mobile phone, which was used by her and his attempt was a genuine one so as to restrain her from misusing the mobile
phone. The place of occurrence is the bed room of the survivor. That itself would intensify the seriousness of the offence alleged against him and as
the gravity of the allegation levelled against him is grave and serious in nature, I do not think that this is a fit case in which pre-arrest bail can be
granted in favour of the petitioner as requested. But considering the entire facts involved in this case, I think that this petition can be disposed of
directing the petitioner to surrender before the investigating officer at the earliest and co-operate with the investigation of the case.