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

2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 45297

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

TUESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 28TH POUSHA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 7881 OF 2021 CRIME NO.669/2021 OF UDAYAMPEROOF POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

KIRAN N.S., AGED 30 YEARS SON OF NATARAJAN, NO. 11 F2 -B KAMALA STREET. NORTH SURGUNAVEDHI, NAGERCOIL, THAMILNADU, PIN - 629001 BY ADV SASTHAMANGALAM S. AJITHKUMAR RESPONDENT/STATE AND DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031

2 XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX BY ADVS.

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR AASHIQUE AKTHAR HAJJIGOTHI(K/357-B/2017)

SRI. M.C. ASHI (PP)

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

This is an application for anticipatory bail.

2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.669/2021 of Udayamperoor police station, Ernakulam district, alleging commission of offences under Section 67A of the Information Technology Act r/w. Section 376, 354A, 354B and 509 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that, he came into contact with the de facto complainant over a matrimonial website and expressed his desire to get married to her. It is submitted that on the promise that an engagement ceremony will be held, the petitioner arrived at the Nedumbasserry airport from his place of work and thereafter he took the de facto complainant to a hotel and sexually abused her and thereafter, he withdrew from the engagement ceremony itself raising some silly issues. In particular, it is alleged that one of the issues raised was that food served at the engagement ceremony was not up to the mark.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had vehemently argued before me that no offence of rape can be alleged against the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner is absolutely innocent in the matter and that there was no sexual assault, as alleged by the de facto complainant. It is submitted that at any rate, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the de facto complainant have taken me through the First Information Statement given by the de facto complainant and has pointed out that the petitioner had clearly exploited the de facto complainant after promising to marry her. It is submitted that the petitioner had withdrawn from the promise of marriage and also from the engagement ceremony itself citing some silly reasons. It is submitted that a poor girl had been subjected to sexual assault and rape by the petitioner after obtaining her consent in a fraudulent manner. It is submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to anticipatory bail.

6. Though mediation was attempted between the petitioner and the de facto complainant, it is submitted that the mediation was unsuccessful.

7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the investigating officer in Crime No.669/2021 of Udayamperoor police station on or before 31.01.2022, his arrest shall be recorded and he shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate on the date of surrender itself. If any application for bail is filed by the petitioner on his production before the Magistrate, the same shall be considered on merits.

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