The petitioner herein has been arrayed as the sole accused in the

instant Crime No.1097/2019 of Muhamma Police Station, Alappuzha, registered for offences punishable under Sec.354A(1)(i) of the Indian Penal Code and Secs.9m & 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. The said crime has been registered on the basis of the First Information Statement given by the mother of the minor victim girl on 21.10.2019 at about 1.30 p.m., in respect of the alleged incident which happened on the previous day (20.10.2019) at about 3.30 p.m.

2. The prosecution case in short is that on 20.10.2019, the minor victim girl aged 10 years had gone along with her parents to visit her mother’s elder sister’s house and they had gone in their autorikshaw which was parked in the nearby road adjacent to the house of the victim girl’s mother’s sister and at about 3.30 p.m. on that day, when the minor victim girl and her cousin sisters were playing inside the said autorikshaw, the petitioner/accused aged 53 years had come near the victim girl and patted her thighs. The girl immediately reported the incident to her mother and after reaching back their home, the mother has given the complaint/FIS to the police, which led to the registration of the instant crime. The petitioner has been arrested in this case on 23.10.2019 and after his remand, has been under detention since then.

3. Smt.M.A.Sulfia, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused would submit that the abovesaid allegations raised against the petitioner are false and baseless and further that the petitioner has already suffered detention in this case for the last 43 days, his continued detention may not be necessary and that this Court may order to release him on regular bail, subject to any stringent conditions, as this Court may deem fit to impose.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the plea for regular bail and has pointed out that this is the third POCSO case, in which the petitioner is getting himself implicated and there is every possibility of the petitioner repeating such offence and that there is also possibility of the petitioner intimidating and influencing the witnesses, more particularly, the minor victim girl and her family members, if he is let out on bail.

5. After hearing both sides and after careful evaluation of the facts and circumstances of this case and taking note of the nature of the allegations disclosed against the petitioner in this case and also the crucial fact that the petitioner has already suffered detention in this case for the last 43 days, this Court is inclined to take the view that the further incarceration of the petitioner could be avoided and he could be released on regular bail, subject to stringent conditions. However, the abovesaid apprehension raised by the prosecution appears to be quite serious and cannot be brushed aside by this Court. This appears to be the third POCSO case, in which the petitioner is getting himself involved. So also, the possibility of influence or intimidation of the witnesses including the minor victim girl and her family members cannot be ruled out by this Court. Accordingly, as a safeguard it is ordered that the petitioner shall not enter into or reside anywhere within the territorial limits of the police station, where the minor victim girl is residing or studying, until the conclusion of the trial process, subject to certain exception which would be dealt with hereinafter. So also, it is ordered that the petitioner shall not get himself involve in any offences, more particularly, the offence of similar nature and in case, he is so involved, then the Investigating Officer will immediately conduct a summary enquiry in that regard and make necessary application, along with the report before the competent Special Court concerned for cancellation of the bail