High CourtsSingle Bench

XXXXXXXXXX vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 7 June 2022 · Citation: (2022) 06 KL CK 0065

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bechu Kurian Thomas, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 376AB, 376(2)(k)(n) · Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 3(b), 4(2), 5(1)(m)(n), 6(1), 7, 8, 11(iii), 12
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 1921 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 · 402 words

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J

1.

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

2.

Petitioner is arrayed as an accused in Crime No.883/2021 of Vadakkekad Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 376AB, 376(2)(k)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 4(2) r/w section 3(b), section 6(1) r/w section 5(1)(m)(n), section 8 r/w Sections 7 and 12 r/w section 11(iii) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

3.

The prosecution allegation is that between 26.10.2021 to 30.10.2021, the petitioner, who is the father of the victim committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault by inserting his fingers into the vagina of the victim. It is further alleged that petitioner watched obscene videos on the mobile phone in the presence of the victim.

4.

Sri.Revikrishnan, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is totally innocent and the allegations are raised due to a matrimonial dispute.

5.

Smt.M.K.Pushpalatha, learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that petitioner was arrested on 19.11.2021 and has been in custody since then.

6.

On a perusal of the case records, I find that the medical examination does not reveal any external injuries noted on the victim, though the said examination was conducted only after a month, immediately after the registration of the FIR. In view of the nature of offences alleged, I do not find any reason to continue the detention of the petitioner especially since the investigation is completed and the final report already filed. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed and petitioner is enlarged on bail on the following conditions:

i) The petitioner shall be execute 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) The petitioner shall co-operate with the trial of the case.

iii) The petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he attempt to tamper with the evidence.

iv) The petitioner shall not commit any similar offence while he is on bail.

v) The petitioner shall not leave the country without the permission of the jurisdictional court.

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 law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.