IMPORTANT POINT
The court, while considering an application for bail, shall consider the nature and gravity of the accusation, the severity of punishment in the event of conviction, the chance of witnesses being influenced by the accused, stage of investigation and other relevant factors. The exercise of discretion in granting bail shall be in a judicious manner and not as a matter of course.

ORDER :

The relief sought in these matters being one and the same, they are disposed of by this common order. The parties and documents are referred to in the order as they appear in Crl.M.C.No.1343 of 2020.

2. Crl.M.C.No.1343 of 2020 is one instituted by the State invoking the power of this Court under Sections 439(2) and 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Code), seeking orders setting aside Annexure-B order in terms of which the Court of the First Additional Sessions Judge, Thrissur granted bail to the respondent who is the sole accused in Crime No.47 of 2020 of Chelakkara Police Station. The crime aforesaid is one registered for offences punishable under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code(the IPC), Sections 9(f), 9(k) and 9(m) read with Section 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (the POCSO Act) and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The accused is a teacher and NCC instructor in the school where the victim girl aged 11 years who is intellectually disabled is pursuing her studies. The accusation is that on 23.01.2020, during lunch break, the accused took the victim girl to the NCC room, locked the room from inside and touched her breast and private parts with sexual intent. As stated, Crl.M.C.No.1237 of 2020 is also one instituted for the same relief by the mother of the victim girl.

3. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor, the learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.M.C.No.1237 of 2020 as also the learned counsel for the accused.

4. The occurrence took place on 23.01.2020. The case was registered on 25.01.2020. The accused was arrested thereupon on 02.02.2020 and he was produced before the Special Court for trial of offences punishable under the POCSO Act on 03.02.2020. Annexure-A is the remand application. In Annexure-A remand application, it is stated that since the accused is a teacher of the school where the victim is pursuing her studies and since the witnesses in the case are all students and teachers of the school, the course of investigation will be affected adversely, if the accused is released on bail and that therefore, he shall be committed to custody. The court below granted bail to the accused on the date of production itself observing that the accused has touched the body of the victim girl only over her dress and that detention of the accused is not necessary for continuing the investigation. The court, however, ordered that grant of bail would be subject to the condition that the accused shall not visit the school for a period of seven days and shall report before the Investigating Officer on all alternate days for a period of two weeks and thereafter once in a week for a further period of two months.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor contended that the materials on record do not indicate that the court below has considered the nature and gravity of the accusation, the severity of punishment in the event of conviction, the chance of witnesses being influenced by the accused and other relevant factors, in the matter of granting bail to the accused. It was pointed out that the accused has been granted bail even before the statements of the witnesses who are the teachers and students of the school where the accused is working, were recorded. It was contended by the learned Public Prosecutor that the decision to enlarge the accused on bail in a case of this nature would certainly affect the investigation in the case and there would, therefore, be no fair trial at all in the case.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.M.C.No.1237 of 2020 has reiterated the submissions made by the learned Public Prosecutor. In addition, it was also argued by the learned counsel that Annexure B order granting bail to the accused is an illustrative case of erroneous and capricious exercise of jurisdiction by the court in the matter of granting bail to an accused in a serious offence.

7. Per contra, the learned counsel for the accused pointed out tha