O R D E R

This Bail Application is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.

2. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.

735/2024 of Chirayinkeezhu Police Station. The above case is registered against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Secs. 354(c), 376(2)(n), 506(ii) of IPC, 1860, Secs.64(1), 75(1)(i), 74, 78, 296(b) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Secs.4(1) r/w 3(a), 6 r/w 5(l) of POCSO Act and Sec.66(E) of IT Act.

3. The prosecution case is that on 17.09.2024, when the defacto complainant returning after finishing her duty, the accused stopped the defacto complainant and uttered obscenity against her and tried to mishandle her. The defacto complainant further alleged that during January, 2015, the accused had taken the nude photos of the defacto complainant without her consent and threatened her to have sexual relationship with the accused. Due to fear, the defacto complainant had sexual intercourse with the accused several times. In 2016, the defacto complainant married and got divorced in 2022. After that also, the accused used to threaten the defacto complainant and compelled her to involve in sexual relationship is the allegation.

4. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor.

5. Admittedly, the victim is now major. The allegation is that in the year 2015, there was sexual relationship. Thereafter, she married. Subsequently, her husband divorced her. Now, there is threat from the petitioner is the allegation.

6. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, I think this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. It is submitted that the petitioner and the defacto complainant were in love and when the accused find out that she is cheating on him and having another relationship, he breaks up with the defacto complainant. Due to the enmity, the defacto complainant filed false complaint against the petitioner. It is also submitted that on 21.08.2024, the defacto complainant's mother given a complaint before the Vanitha Cell against the petitioner contending that the accused threatened the defacto complainant that he will spread her nude photos. Annexure-A1 is produced. On 23.08.2024, the matter was closed before the Vanitha Cell stating that the defacto complainant wants to continue with the complaint. Annexure-A2 is produced to prove the same. Thereafter, the petitioner's mother filed representation before the Superintendent of Police contending that the petitioner and the defacto complainant were in love relationship when the accused find out that she is cheating on him and having another relationship, the petitioner break up the relationship with the defacto complainant. The petitioner also produced Annexure-A3 to show that there are some bank transactions between the petitioner and the defacto complainant. I do not want to discuss all these contentions. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, I think bail can be granted on stringent conditions.

7. Moreover, it is a well accepted principle that the bail is the rule and the jail is the exception. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Chidambaram. P v Directorate of Enforcement [2019 (16) SCALE 870], after considering all the earlier judgments, observed that, the basic jurisprudence relating to bail remains the same inasmuch as the grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception so as to ensure that the accused has the opportunity of securing fair trial.

8. Recently the Apex Court in Siddharth v State of Uttar Pradesh and Another [2021(5)KHC 353]

considered the point in detail. The relevant paragraph of the above judgment is extracted hereunder.

“12. We may note that personal liberty is an important aspect of our constitutional mandate. The occasion to arrest an accused during investigation arises when custodial investigation becomes necessary or it is a heinous crime or where there is a possibility of influencing the witnesses or accused may abscond. Merely