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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 48542

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
H.MOHAMMED RAFI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Application 10789/2025 | Crime No. 1242/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.V.JOHN SEBASTIAN RALPH, SHRI. RALPH RETI JOHN, SHRI.VISHNU CHANDRAN, SHRI.GIRIDHAR KRISHNA KUMAR, SMT.GEETHU T.A., SMT.MARY GREESHMA, SMT.LIZ JOHNY, SMT.KRISHNAPRIYA SREEKUMAR
For the Respondents: SMT. SREEJA V., PP

Period of custody undergone is a decisive factor in bail applications for serious offences, permitting discharge if continued detention lacks justification even in cases involving minors.

Headnote:(A) Bail Application under Section 483, BNSS 2023 - POCSO Act, 2012, Sections 9(1) & 10 - BNS 2023, Section 74 - Accused (uncle of minor victim aged 14) alleged sexual harassment including acts in 2020, March 2025, April 2025 - Arrested 14.08.2025 and in custody since - Court granted bail considering period of custody undergone. (Para 8)

(B) Court may grant bail in serious sexual offence cases against minors when accused has undergone sufficient custody period, rendering further detention unnecessary. (Para 8)

Facts of the case:
Petitioner (64-year-old uncle) arrested for alleged sexual harassment of 14-year-old victim involving hugging, kissing and caressing in 2020, March 2025, and April 2025, detained since arrest.

Findings of Court:
Period of custody from 14.08.2025 was deemed sufficient to avoid further detention despite serious allegations.

Issues: Whether bail warranted after substantial pre-trial custody despite POCSO nature of offences.

Ratio Decidendi: Custodial period is a pivotal factor; courts exercise discretion to grant bail when detention duration negates need for continued custody.

Result: Bail granted with conditions.

Table of Content
1. bail application filing and case background (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. bail arguments from both parties (Para 5 , 6)
3. bail grant based on custody period (Para 7 , 8)

ORDER

This bail application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘ BNSS ’).

2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1242 of 2025 of Kottiyam Police Station, Kollam, registered for the offences punishable under section 9(1) r/w Section 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short ‘POCSO Act’) and under Section 74 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘ BNS ’).

3. According to the prosecution, the accused, who is the uncle of the victim, had sexually harassed the victim by hugging and kissing her in the year 2020 and again repeated the said act in March 2025 and also, in April 2025, caressed the leg of the victim and thereby committed the offences alleged. Petitioner was arrested on 14.08.2025, and he has been in custody since then.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 14.08.2025, and hence further detention is not necessary.

6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted that he ought not to be released on bail.

7. Petitioner is alleged to have sexually harassed the minor victim aged 14 years. A reading of the statement of the victim indicates that the accused had hugged and kissed the victim in the year 2020 and again repeated the said act in March 2025. In April 2025 he is alleged to have caressed the leg of the victim.

8. Though the allegations are serious, especially considering the age of the petitioner as well as that of the victim, I am of the view that bearing in mind the period of custody already undergone from 14.08.2025, further detention is not necessary.

In the result, this application is allowed 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 when 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 commit any similar offences while he is on bail.

In case of violation of any of the above conditions or if any modification or deletion of the conditions are required, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider such applications, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.

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