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) 9436

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
SATHEESAN M – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 728 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.691/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sri.Titus Mani, Sri.P.A.Jacob, Sri.Binny Thomas, Sri.Swaroop A.P., Sri.Akshay Sankar P., Sri.R.Krishnanunni, Smt.Sreya Madhusudhan
For the Respondents: Smt.Sreeja V.

The court held that the nature of the alleged offences justified denial of bail due to their serious and premeditated nature.

Headnote:This application seeks bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, as the applicant is the sole accused in Crime No.691/2025 involving serious allegations under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The court found no material linking the applicant to the alleged crime, emphasizing the gravity of the accusations and dismissing the bail request. Ultimately, the applicant is not entitled to bail at this stage due to the serious nature of the crimes charged.

Table of Content
1. applicant accused of serious sexual offences against a minor. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments for and against bail application. (Para 4 , 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.691/2025 of Kasaba Police Station, Kozhikode District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 6 (1), 5(l), 5(m) and 5(p) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act , 2012.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 12.10.2025 at about 2.30 p.m., the applicant committed penetrative sexual assault on the survivor-boy, while the survivor was standing on a plot in front of the survivor's house, taking him to a nearby plot, under the pretext of showing him a calf and thereby committed the offences.

4. I have heard Sri.Titus Mani Vettom, the learned counsel for the applicant and Smt.Sreeja V., 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 27.11.2025. 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. This is a case where the applicant who is a 60 year old man brutally sexually assaulted a 11 year old mentally disabled boy. 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