Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 11TH JYAISHTA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 3957 OF 2023 CRIME NO.454/2023 OF VALANCHERRY POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED: XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX BY ADVS. K.B.ARUNKUMAR POOJA K.S. RESPONDENTS/STATE: 1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682031 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER VALANCHERRY POLICE STATION, VALANCHERRY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 676552 ADV SEETHA S -SR PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: :2 :
ORDER
Dated this the 1st day of June, 2023 This is an application for anticipatory bail.
2. The petitioner is the accused in crime No.454/2023 of
Valancherry Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 354 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 10 and 9(n) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The defacto complainant is the sister of the petitioner's wife.
3. The prosecution case is as follows: The wife of the
petitioner was in her paternal residence after delivery. On 06.05.2023 at about 7.45 a.m., the accused, along with his parents and friends, went to visit the baby of the petitioner. At that time, there occurred some heated exchange of words between the petitioner and his wife. Thereupon the defacto complainant, the younger sister of the wife of the petitioner and a minor, intervened, and the acts of the petitioner were questioned. This ultimately led to a scuffle between the parties, and during the
:3 : course of the said scuffle, the petitioner allegedly caught hold of the defacto complainant, pressed on her right breast and buttock, and tried to kiss her. The crime was registered in such circumstances. As the petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with the investigation of the said case, this application for anticipatory bail is submitted.
4. Heard Sri. K.B. Arun Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Seetha S., the learned Public Prosecutor for the State.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was falsely implicated in this case because of certain matrimonial disputes between the petitioner and his wife. It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, even going by the statement of the victim, it is evident that the allegations raised are highly improbable. The petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and shall abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court.
6. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor would oppose the aforesaid prayer. It is pointed out that it is a matter under investigation, and the dismissal of the bail :4 : application is sought in such circumstances.
7. I have gone through the records. It is true that in the
statement of the victim, there are certain allegations raised against the petitioner. However, it is evident from the statement that the petitioner allegedly committed all the said acts during the course of a scuffle. The scuffle was between the petitioner and
his wife, and the defacto complainant tried to intervene. The allegation is that the petitioner caught hold of her breast and buttock during the said time and also tried to kiss her. From careful scrutiny of the victim's statement, the only inference that could be drawn is that the sexual intention behind such acts is highly improbable, as evidently, the said acts were allegedly committed during the scuffle. It is also a crucial aspect to be noticed in this regard that the aforesaid incident occurred admittedly in front of the wife of the petitioner. Besides the same, the incident happened in the residence of the wife of the petitioner, and at the relevant time, the parents of the petitioner and in-laws were also there. In such circumstances, I find some force in the contention put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioner regarding the improbability of the allegations for
:5 :
attracting the offence under the POCSO Act and Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code. There is the possibility that the crime was registered consequent to some matrimonial disputes between the petitioner and his wife, which escalated due to the scuffle on the relevant day. In such circumstances, I am inclined to pass some orders to protect the personal liberty of the petitioner by incorporating appropriate conditions to ensure his cooperation with the investigation.
In such circumstances, this bail application is disposed of with the following directions:
(1) The petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer, within a period of two weeks from today, for subjecting himself to interrogation.
(2) After interrogation, the petitioner shall be released on
bail on the very same day of surrender upon the petitioner executing a bond for `1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties each for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
(3) The petitioner shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting himself to the deemed police custody for the purpose of recovery, if any, as and when demanded.
(4) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m. every :6 : Saturday until the filing of the final report.
(5) The petitioner shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.
(6) The petitioner shall not commit any offence of similar nature while on bail.
(7) The petitioner shall not make any 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.
(8) The petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the Jurisdictional Court. In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law. Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE ncd