High CourtsSingle Bench

XXXXXXXXXX vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 4 July 2022 · Citation: (2022) 07 KL CK 0029

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bechu Kurian Thomas, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 323, 354, 354D, 366A, 376(3) · Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 3(a), 3(b), 4, 7, 8, 11(iv), 12
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 4735 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

15 paragraphs · 489 words

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J

1.

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

2.

Petitioner  is  the 2nd  accused  in  Crime  No.478/2022,  on the  files  of the  Kilikolloor  Police  Station,  Kollam  District,  alleging offences   under   Sections 323, 354, 354D, 366A   and 376(3)   r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 4 r/w Sections 3(a), 3(b), Section 8 r/w Section 7, Section 12 r/w Section 11(iv) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

3.

The prosecution case is that on 21.05.2022,  after the  15 year old victim went missing, investigation commenced on the basis of  information  received  from  the  de-facto  complainant. Subsequently,  petitioner,  along with other accused were intercepted in   a   motor  vehicle   along  with   the   victim  who   was   in   a   semi-conscious  state  and  thereafter,   when  the  statement  of  the  victim was  taken,  it was  revealed  that  she  was  subjected  to  penetrative sexual assault and trafficking by four persons,  thereby committing the offences alleged.

4.

Shri.Shibu Joseph the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the allegation against the 2nd accused is that while he accompanied accused Nos.1  and 3  on 21.05.2022,  he kissed the victim   and   pressed   her   breast,   thereby   committing   the   offences alleged.

5.

Shri.  C.K.Suresh,  the  learned  Public  Prosecutor,  on  the other hand contended that the allegations against the petitioner are serious   in   nature   and   though   the   petitioner   was   arrested   on 21.05.2022,  releasing  him  at  this juncture  will  cause  prejudice  to the prosecution case.

6.

Shri. Sunil Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the defacto complainant contended that the petitioner has committed the offence along with the other accused and therefore, he ought not to be released on bail.

7.

Considering the circumstances arising in the case and on perusing the case diary,  I am satisfied that the continued detention of the petitioner is not required, especially since he was arrested as early  as  on 21.05.2022.  The  age  of the  petitioner  being  only  23 also compels me to allow this application.

8.

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  witnesses;  nor  shall  he  tamper  with  the evidence or contact the victim or her family members.

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

v)  Petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the Court having jurisdiction.

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.