SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Ker) 89

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, J.
Devarajan S/o Madhavan, Dwarakayil – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala – Respondent
Crl. Appeal No. 88 of 2021
Decided On : 09-03-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Sri. Mansoor B.H.
For the Respondent: Smt. M.K. Pushpalatha.

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - S. 438 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 354, 354-A(1)(i) 354-B and 376 - Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012 - Section 3(a) read with Sections 4, 4(1) and 7 read with Section 8 - Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) - Rejection of bail application - Penetrative sexual assault

Finding of the Court:

Major part of the investigation is almost complete. The appellant is aged 71 years. The appellant is not involved in any other offence - further detention of the appellant is not necessary in this case - Bail granted on imposing conditions

Result: Petition allowed.

JUDGMENT :

B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, J.

1. The appellant is the accused in Crime No. 706 of 2020 of Kanakakunnu Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 354-A(1)(i), 354- B and 376-AB IPC and Section 3(a) read with Sections 4, 4(1) and 7 read with Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012 and Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The appellant filed Crl. M.P. No. 90 of 2021 before the court below praying for the relief under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The court below, as per the order impugned, dismissed the application against which this Criminal Appeal has been filed.

2. The prosecution allegation is that on a day after Onam in 2020, the appellant committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim after removing her underwear.

3. The appellant was arrested on 28.12.2020 and ever since, he has been in custody.

4. It has been submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the major part of the investigation is almost complete. The appellant is aged 71 years. The appellant is not involved in any other offence, submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the further detention of the appellant is not necessary in this case. In the said circumstances, I am inclined to grant bail to the appellant.

5. In the result, this Criminal Appeal stands allowed, setting aside the order impugned and the appellant is directed to be enlarged on bail on condition of the appellant executing a bond for Rs. 40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand only) with two solvent sureties, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Special court concerned and subject to the following further conditions:

    (i) The appellant shall report before the Investigating Officer on every Monday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. for one month and thereafter, as and when required by the Investigating Officer for interrogation.

(ii) The appellant shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses or in any way tamper with the investigation.

(iii) The appellant shall not enter into the jurisdiction of Kanakakunnu Police Station for a period of two months without the leave of the learned Magistrate.

(iv) The appellant shall co-operate with the investigation.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top