Full Judgment
B.A No.2451 of 2024 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 23RD CHAITHRA, 1946 BAIL APPL. NO. 2451 OF 2024 CRIME NO.161/2024 OF Viyyur Police Station, Thrissur PETITIONER: YADHU AGED 18 YEARS S/O.KRISHNANKUTTY KADINAKKARA HOUSE, KUNNAMPULLY, KUMBALAKKODE P.O, PAZHAYANNUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT., PIN - 680587 BY ADV NIREESH MATHEW RESPONDENT: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI., PIN - 682031 OTHER PRESENT: pp maya m.n. PP MAYA M.N THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: B.A No.2451 of 2024 2 V.G.ARUN J. ------------------------------- B.A.No.2451 of 2024 -------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of April 2024
ORDER
The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.161 of 2024 of the Viyyur Police Station registered for offences punishable under Sections 366A,376(2)(n) and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 67(b) of Information Technology Act,2008 and Section 4(1) r/w. 3(a), 5 (j)(ii), 6(1), 9(a)(i), 10, 12, r/w.11(iv) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 2019. The crime is registered on the allegation that, after befriending the survivor through Instagram, the petitioner pretended to be in love with her and after abducting her to Bangalore, committed penetrative sexual assault on the survivor many times between 17/01/2023 to
continuing in custody.
2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
allegations are patently false and actually the survivor had come over to Bangalore and resided in the petitioner's flat out of her love towards him. At that time, the petitioner was also a minor, his date of birth being 08/06/2005. Whatever had taken place between the petitioner and the survivor during that was based on mutual
B.A No.2451 of 2024 3
consent. Hence, the allegation that the petitioner had committed penetrative sexual assault on the survivor cannot be countenanced. It is contended that the petitioner being a minor when the incident had occurred, he can be proceeded against only under the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act and being so, the petitioner is liable to be released on bail.
3. I heard the learned Public Prosecutor also.
4. No doubt, the offences alleged against the petitioner are
serious in nature. On the other hand, even going by the prosecution allegation, the survivor had resided in the petitioner's flat at Bangalore from 17/01/2023 to 30/12/2023. Though the survivor was only 16 at that time, the fact that the petitioner had also not attained 18 years, assumes relevance. Taking into account the above mentioned factors, I find the continued incarceration of the petitioner to be unnecessary.
5. For the aforementioned reason, the bail application is
allowed with the following conditions; i) The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court. One among the sureties shall either be a parent or a near relative of the petitioner.
B.A No.2451 of 2024 4
ii) The petitioner shall surrender his passport before the jurisdictional court within two weeks of release and if he does not hold a passport, shall file an affidavit to that effect. iii) The petitioner shall not enter the limits of the Viyyur Police Station for one month, except for the purpose of casting his vote in the election to be held on 26/04/2024. iv) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the survivor or the witnesses in any manner whatsoever. v) Petitioner shall not get involved in any offence of similar nature while on bail.
If the petitioner violates any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to approach this Court for cancellation of bail. Sd/- V.G.ARUN JUDGE dpk