Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MAY 2023 / 5TH JYAISHTA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 2795 OF 2023 (Crime No. 183/2023 of Thodupuzha Police Station) PETITIONER/ACCUSED: XXX AGED 23 YEARS XXXX, PIN - 685585 BY ADVS. ARUN FRANCIS DEENA JOSEPH HARIKRISHNAN K. RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: STATE OF KERALA STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, THODUPUZHA POLICE STATION, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031., PIN - 682031 OTHER PRESENT: ADV SEETHA S -PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.05.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This is an application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking regular bail.
2. The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 354 A(1) (i), 354 B, 376 (3), 376 (2) (n), 354 (D) (1)(i), 506, 323, 294(b) & 363 of Indian Penal Code and under also under Sections 8 read with Section 7, 4 (1) read with Section 3(a), 6(1) read with Section 5(1), 12 read with Section 11 (iv), 11 (v) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, under Section 67 B (b) of IT Act and under Section 84 of the Juvenile Justice Act.
3. The prosecution case is as follows: the petitioner and
the victim girl, aged 14, are neighbours. It is alleged that the accused obtained nude photographs of the victim and threatened her by using the said photographs. Later, she was subjected to forceful sexual assault on multiple occasions and thereby committed the aforementioned offences. It is also alleged that the victim was constantly threatened by the petitioner herein. The crime was registered in such circumstances, and as part of the investigation of the said case, the petitioner was arrested on 06.02.2023. Since then, he has been under judicial detention. The petitioner submits this application for regular bail in such circumstances.
4. Heard, Sri. Arun Francis, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Seetha.S, the learned Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is innocent of all the allegations and was falsely implicated in the said case. It was further pointed out that the investigation in this case is already completed, and the final report is filed. The petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the trial and shall
abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. In such circumstances, the incarceration of the petitioner is not at all necessary, contends the learned counsel for the petitioner.
6. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor would
oppose the aforesaid contentions. It is pointed out that specific allegations were raised against the petitioner, and in the investigation conducted by police, ample materials were collected evidencing the commission of offences by the petitioner. Even though the final report is submitted, merely because of that reason, the petitioner cannot be released on bail. As he is a neighbour, in all probabilities, he is likely to influence the witness. The dismissal of the bail application is sought in such circumstances.
7. I have gone through the records and heard the
contentions raised from both sides. The learned Public Prosecutor made available the copies of the statements given by the defacto complainant before the police and before the learned Magistrate under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. It is discernible therefrom that, a detailed description of each and every sexual assault committed by the petitioner has been mentioned in both the said statements. It reveals various kinds of sexual assaults, threats and intimidation etc. On going through the aforesaid aspects, I find some force in the apprehension voiced by the learned Public Prosecutor as to the possibility of influencing the witnesses. In such circumstances, taking note of the nature of the allegations and gravity of the offences, I do not find this as a fit case in which bail can be granted to the petitioner merely because the investigation has been completed. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A JUDGE rpk