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) 7855

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
NIJAS – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Appl./4219/2022



Bail can be granted when the investigation is complete, and continued detention is not justified under the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Headnote:

Bail - Criminal Procedure - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 439; Indian Penal Code, 1860: Sections 363, 354A, 384, 506; Information Technology Act, 2000: Section 67B; Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012: Sections 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 - Court granted bail considering the completion of investigation and absence of necessity for continued detention.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, accused of serious offenses involving a minor, sought regular bail after being in custody since March 2022. The prosecution argued against bail citing the gravity of the allegations.

Issues: Whether the petitioner should be granted bail under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure considering the nature of the allegations and the status of the investigation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court highlighted that a completed investigation and filing of the final report reduced the need for continued custody, indicating that bail could be granted.

Final Decision: The application for bail is allowed with conditions.

ORDER

This is an application for regular bail filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 .

2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.232/2022 of the Mangalapuram Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 363 , 354A(1)(i), 384 & Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 67B of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Sections 8 ,7,10,9 (l), 12, 11(ii) (iv) & (v) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 .

3. The prosecution case is that, petitioner, who is a family friend of the victim had been in acquaintance with her for the last two years and misusing the friendship, committed aggravative sexual assault on the victim, aged 16 years in September 2021 and December 2021 and thus committed the offences alleged.

4. Sri.Shajin S.Hameed, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner was arrested on 10.03.2022 and has been in custody since then. According to him, the entire prosecution allegation is false and the petitioner ought to be enlarged on bail.

5. Smt.M.K.Pushpalatha, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of bail and submitted that the allegations are serious in nature and that if the petitioner is released on bail, it would prejudice the prosecution. It was also submitted that the final report was filed as early as on 09.05.2022.

6. Considering the young age of the petitioner and on a perusal of the case diary, I am of the view that the continued detention of the petitioner is not required in the circumstances of the case, more so since the investigation is over and the final report has already been filed. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.

In the result, this application is allowed on the following conditions:-

(a) The petitioner shall be released on bail on his 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) The petitioner shall co-operate with the trial of the case. c) Petitioner shall not enter into the jurisdictional limits of Mangalapuram Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, nor in any place near MV Higher Secondary School, where the victim studies, till the conclusion of the trial.

(d) 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;

(e) The petitioner shall not commit any similar offence while he is on bail.

(f) The petitioner shall not leave the country without the permission of the jurisdictional Court.

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.

sd/

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE jm/

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 4219/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure-C FREE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 25/05/2022 IN CRL.M.P.NO.1037/2022 OF THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE FOR THE TRIAL OF CASES RELATING TO ATROCITIES AND SEXUAL VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND CHILDREN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

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