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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 715

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
APPU – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 17 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.1138/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.S.R.PRASANTH, SMT.BHANU THILAK, SMT.AISWARYA KRISHNAN, SMT.APARNA S.
For the Respondents: SRI.U.JAYAKRISHNAN- PP

The court allowed bail based on insufficient evidence for continued detention, emphasizing presumptive innocence.

Headnote:This application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking regular bail. The applicant is accused in Crime No.1138/2025 for serious offences under relevant statutes including the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The key issue is whether the applicant's detention is necessary, with the court finding no evidence necessitating continued incarceration. The application is allowed with conditions pertaining to bail compliance and cooperation with the investigation.

Table of Content
1. allegations of serious crimes against the applicant. (Para 2 , 3)
2. arguments presented by both sides regarding bail. (Para 5)

O R D E R

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

2. The applicant is the sole accused in Crime No.1138/2025 of Vallikunnam Police Station, Alappuzha District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 3 32 (b), 64, 64(2)(f) and 64(2)(m) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘ BNS ’) and Sections 4 (2) read with Section 3 (a), Section 6 read with Section 5 (l)(n) and Section 12 read with Section 11 (iv) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short ‘PoCSO Act’).

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the applicant repeatedly committed rape and penetrative sexual assault on the victim and thereby committed the offences.

4. I have heard Sri.Prasanth S.R., the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri.U. Jayakrishnan, the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicant with the alleged crime; hence, he is entitled to bail. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicant, and he is not entitled to bail at this stage.

6. The applicant was remanded to judicial custody on

29.11.2025. The investigation is almost over. The applicant and the victim are cousins. A reading of the FIS would show that the applicant and the victim were in love for the last ten years and they had consensual sex on earlier occasions also. It is true that the victim is a minor. However, considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any reason to hold that the continued detention of the applicant is required for any purpose. Hence, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

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

(i) The applicant shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Magistrate/Court.

(ii) The applicant shall fully co-operate with the investigation.

(iii) The applicant shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m. every Saturday until further orders. He shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required.

(iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.

(v) The applicant shall not attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

(vi) The applicant shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.

(vii) The application, if any, for deletion/modification of the bail conditions or cancellation of bail on the grounds of violating the bail conditions shall be filed at the jurisdictional court.

Sd/-

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE NP APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. NO. 17 OF 2026 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 26/12/2025 IN CRL. M.C NO. 3400/2025 BEFORE THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE-I, KOLLAM

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