The court granted bail based on the victim's affidavit expressing no objection, the accused's lack of criminal history, and the nature of their relationship.

ORDER

1. This is an Application for regular bail filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 . The Applicant is the sole accused in Crime No. 288/2025 of Mathilakam Police Station, Thrissur, registered under Sections 63(a), 63(d)(vi), 64(2)(m), 75(1)(i), 76, 115(2) and 332(b) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and 3A , 4(1), 6, 51, 5j(ii), 7, 8, 91 , 10 , 6 r/w 5(j)(ii) and 8 r/w 7 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 which includes non-bailable offences. The Applicant was arrested on 18.03.2025.

2. The allegations against the Applicant are that on 08.03.2025, around at 10.30 am, the Applicant had sexually abused the 17 years aged victim at her house and on 17.03.2025, at around 08.00 PM, the Applicant demanded the victim’s mobile phone, but the victim refused to give it to the Applicant and hence he physically assaulted the victim.

3. I heard the learned counsel for the Applicant, Sri. Reji. R and the learned Public Prosecutor, Smt. Seetha. S.

4. The contention of the learned counsel for the Applicant are that the Applicant is innocent and there exists romantic relationship between the Applicant aged 19 years and the victim aged 17 years; that the case was registered on a misunderstanding; that later when the victim on attaining majority has filed Annexure A3 Affidavit stating that she has no objection in granting the bail; and that the Applicant is ready to abide by any condition if this Court grants him bail.

5. The Application is opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor.

6. After hearing both sides, I find that the Applicant is aged 19 years, and the victim was 17 years at the time of the offence. The FI Statement of the Victim would reveal that the Applicant and the victim were in a romantic relationship. The victim/2^nd respondent, after attaining majority, has sworn an affidavit admitting her relationship with the Applicant and expressing no objection to granting bail to the Applicant. The Applicant has no criminal antecedents. The Applicant has remained in custody for a considerable length of time for interrogation by the Investigating Officer. No useful purpose would be served by continuing the custody of the Applicant. Denial of bail shall not be for detaining the accused as a matter of punishment. I do not find any chance of the Applicant fleeing from justice, if adequate safeguards are made for preventing the same. Considering the age of the parties, their relationship, and the detention of the Applicant since 18.03.2025, there is no reason to deny bail to the Applicant.

7. In view of the aforesaid findings, I allow this Bail Application, granting bail to the Applicant subject to the following conditions.

1. The Applicant shall 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 jurisdictional Court.

2. Applicant shall co-operate with the investigation and make themselves available before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

3. Applicant shall not try to contact the witnesses or make any promise, influence, inducement or threat to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing the facts to the Police.

4. Applicant shall not leave India without the permission of the jurisdictional Court.

5. If any of the above conditions are violated by the Applicant, the jurisdictional Court is free to cancel the bail granted by this Order. It is open to the Prosecution/De facto complainant to approach the jurisdictional Court in this regard.