Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 46662
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
CHRISTIN JOSEPH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Appl. 10363 2022
TITUS MANI, T.G.RAGESH, P.A.JACOB, BINNY THOMAS, SWAROOP A.P.
The court established that the age of the accused and the relationship context can influence the decision on bail in serious offences, allowing for release under stringent conditions.
Headnote:
Bail - Regular Bail - CrPC Section 439, IPC Sections 450, 354D, 376, POCSO Sections 3, 4, 7, 8 - The Court discussed the provisions for bail under CrPC while weighing the seriousness of the allegations and the young age of the accused, ultimately allowing bail subject to strict conditions.
Fact of the Case:
The accused is facing serious charges under multiple sections of the IPC and POCSO Act for allegedly raping a 17-year-old victim. The accused, aged 18, claims the allegations are false and that he was in a romantic relationship with the victim.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted the young ages of both the accused and the victim, considering their relationship, and deemed that further detention of the petitioner was not justified. It also wanted to prevent the possibility of witness intimidation.
Issues: Whether to grant bail to the accused charged with serious offences, considering the nature of allegations and the possibility of witness tampering.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the age of the accused and the context of their relationship are significant factors in determining bail, emphasizing protection against potential witness intimidation.
Final Decision: Bail granted under strict conditions.
ORDER
This is an application seeking regular bail filed under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 .
2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1155/2022 of Nedumkandam Police Station, Idukki, alleging offences punishable under Sections 450 , 354D and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 , 4, 7 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 .
3. According to the prosecution, on 17.09.2022, the accused raped the victim aged 17 years and thereby committed the offences alleged.
4. Adv.Titus Mani, appearing for petitioner contended that the entire prosecution allegations are false and the incident as alleged had not occurred. It was further submitted that the petitioner and the victim were in a romantic relationship and that petitioner is only 18 years in age, who was arrested on 14.11.2022. The learned counsel further pointed out that having regard to the nature of allegations, further detention ought not to be permitted.
5. Smt.C.Seena, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of bail and contended that the allegations are serious and that if the petitioner is released on bail, there is every chance of him influencing/
intimidating the witnesses.
6. I have considered the rival contentions and have also perused the statement of the victim. Petitioner is only 18 years in age while the victim is 17 years in age. Taking note of the alleged relationship between the petitioner and the victim and also having regard to the young age of the petitioner, I am of the view that further detention of the petitioner ought not to be permitted.
7. Accordingly, I allow this application on the following conditions :-
(a) Petitioner shall be released on bail on him executing 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.
(b) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and hen required.
(c) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence or contact the victim or her family members.
(d) Petitioner shall not contact the victim either through phone or through any other mode of communication nor shall he enter into the house of the victim for any purpose whatsoever.
(e) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is on bail.
(f) Petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the Court having jurisdiction.
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 the law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE RKM
