Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

XXXXXXXX vs State of Kerala

XXXXXXXX vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Feb 21, 2022
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1441196

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala Orders High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Bail Appl./176/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

XXXXXXXX

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....in the matter. it is submitted that he has been in custody from 26.9.2021 and that his continued detention is not necessary for the purposes of any investigation. it is submitted that a false complaint has been registered against the petitioner on account of someissues between the petitioner and the mother of the victim.5. i have heard the learned public prosecutor also.6. the learned public prosecutor vehemently opposes the grant ofbail. it is submitted that the pregnancy of the victim was terminated and the dna test conducted reveals that the petitioner was responsible for the pregnancy of the minor victim. it is pointed out that the report specifically b.a.no.176/2022 3 states that the petitioner is the biological father of the fetus of the victim. it is submitted that, if the petitioner is released on bail, there is every chance that the victim and other material witnesses may be intimidated in the matter. having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, i am clearly of the opinion that this is a case, which warrants a custodial trial. the bail application fails and it is dismissed. sd/- gopinath p. judge acd b.a.no.176/2022 4 appendix of bail appl. 176/2022 petitioner annexures annexure1 the true copy of the order of the pocso court in cmp no. 937/2021 dated 16.11.2021

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 2ND PHALGUNA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 176 OF 2022 CRIME NO.1107 OF 2021 OF KURUPPAMPADY POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM PETITIONER/ACCUSED : AGED 22 YEARS XXXXXXXX, PIN - 782120 BY ADV SHABU SREEDHARAN RESPONDENT/S: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 2 XXXXXXXX AGED 13 YEARS BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OTHER PRESENT: SRI. NOUSHAD K.A. (SR.PP) THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: B.A.No.176/2022 2

ORDER

This is an application for regular bail.

2. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1107/2021 of

Kuruppampady Police Station, Ernakulam District, alleging commission of offences under Sections 376(2)(f), 376(2)(n) and 376(3) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that he committed

penetrative sexual assault on his step daughter on several occasions as a result of which she became pregnant. It is alleged that owing to the threat from the petitioner, the victim did not reveal the incident to anyone including her mother.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner is absolutely innocent in the matter. It is submitted that he has been in custody from 26.9.2021 and that his continued detention is not necessary for the purposes of any investigation. It is submitted that a false complaint has been registered against the petitioner on account of some

issues between the petitioner and the mother of the victim.

5. I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor also.

6. The learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the grant of

bail. It is submitted that the pregnancy of the victim was terminated and the DNA test conducted reveals that the petitioner was responsible for the pregnancy of the minor victim. It is pointed out that the report specifically B.A.No.176/2022 3 states that the petitioner is the biological father of the fetus of the victim. It is submitted that, if the petitioner is released on bail, there is every chance that the victim and other material witnesses may be intimidated in the matter. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am clearly of the opinion that this is a case, which warrants a custodial trial. The bail application fails and it is dismissed. sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE acd B.A.No.176/2022 4 APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 176/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE POCSO COURT IN CMP NO. 937/2021 DATED 16.11.2021

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial