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) 7547

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
DINESH DAYAL RAI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 513 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.97/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sri. Aneesh K.R
For the Respondents: Sri.M.C. Ashi, Sr. PP

The court denied bail due to the serious nature of the offenses and potential risk to the victim.

Headnote:This judgment pertains to a bail application made under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in relation to serious charges, including sexual assault against a minor. The court finds the accusation serious and highlights the risk of influencing the victim if bail is granted. The court determines that due to the grave nature of the offenses and circumstances, bail is denied. The court stated, 'Considering the nature of the crime... I am of the view that the applicant cannot be released on bail at this stage.' Therefore, the outcome is that the bail application is dismissed.

Table of Content
1. serious charges of sexual assault against minor (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments regarding innocence and implications (Para 4 , 5)

O R D E R

This is the second application 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.97/2025 of Kunnathunadu Police Station, Ernakulam District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 6 4 (1), 64(2)(f)(m), 65(1), 74, 75, 76, 115(2), 118(1), and 126(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 , Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and Section 4 (1)(2) read with Section 3 (a) and Section 6 (1) read with Section 5 (l)(n) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (PoCSO) Act, 2012.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the applicant committed penetrative sexual assault repeatedly on the victim, aged 15 years, who is none other than his daughter, and thereby committed the offences alleged.

4. I have heard Sri.Aneesh K.R., the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri.M.C.Ashi, the learned Senior 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 Senior 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 26.01.2025. A perusal of the case diary would reveal that the accusation against the applicant is very serious, and it prima facie shows a premeditated criminal act on his part. The applicant is aged 40 years and the victim is aged 15 years. There was penetrative sexual assault on the victim. If the applicant is released on bail, there is every chance that he may threaten or influence the victim. Considering the nature of the crime, the gravity of the offence, the complicity of the applicant in it, and the facts and circumstances mentioned above, I am of the view that the applicant cannot be released on bail at this stage.

The bail application, accordingly, is dismissed.

Sd/-

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