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) 12882

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
SAJITH P.S – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 999 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sri.Vivek Venugopal
For the Respondents: Smt.Sreeja V.

The court outlined the conditions under which bail may be granted, considering the nature of the relationship and the absence of prior convictions.

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. 103/2026. The court finds that although the sexual relationship was consensual, the applicant did breach the promise of marriage. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and is entitled to bail as detention is not required. The bail is granted subject to specified conditions.

Table of Content
1. the case involves a bail application related to allegations of false promise and sexual offenses. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments presented by both parties regarding the viability of bail. (Para 4 , 5)

ORDER

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 accused in Crime No.103/2026 of Varapuzha Police Station, Ernakulam District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 69 and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the applicant after giving a false promise of marriage had oral sex with the victim thrice on 08.07.2025 at Kadamakkudy and thereafter, had sexual intercourse with her on 29.11.2025 at Anu's Lodge, Mattoor village. It is further alleged that the applicant induced the victim to pay Rs.7,00,000/- and cheated her by withdrawing from the promise of marriage and thereby committed the offences.

4. I have heard Sri.Vivek Venugopal, 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

06.02.2026. A reading of the FIS would show that the applicant and the victim were in a relationship and they had sex several times. The victim is a divorcee and the applicant is married. However, according to the victim, she was not aware that the applicant was married. Admittedly, the sexual relationship was consensual in nature. But, according to the victim, she gave consent for sex since the applicant promised that he would marry her. The question whether the applicant had sexual intercourse with the victim after giving false promise of marriage, is a matter of evidence. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. He is in custody since 06.02.2026. The investigation is almost over. For these reasons, 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

SKP

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. NO. 999 OF 2026 PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES:

Annexure 2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED

09.02.2026 IN CRL.MP. NO.1/2026 PASSED BY THE JUDL. FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-III, N.PARAVUR RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURE

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