Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V FRIDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 28TH POUSHA, 1940 Bail Appl..No. 252 of 2019 CRIME NO.1366/2017 OF KATTAPPANA POLICE STATION, IDUKKI PETITIONER/ACCUSED: RAJESH, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O CHAKRAPANI, THOTTARIKATHU HOUSE, KARANJIMAMPANTHA P.O.KATTAKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT 695 572. BY ADV. SMT.SIMLA PRABHAKARAN RESPONDENT/STATE: STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, COCHIN-31. OTHER PRESENT: SRI. ANAS K. A.- PP. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: BA:252/19 2
ORDER
This application is filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.
2. The applicant herein is the accused in Crime No.1366 of
2017 registered at the Kattappana Police Station under Sections 366, 450, 376 of the IPC and Section 3(a) r/w. Section 4, 5(i) r/w. Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
3. The victim in the aforesaid Crime is a girl aged 17 years.
On 19.10.2017, she was found missing and based on the information furnished by her father, the above crime was registered under Section 57 of the Kerala Police Act, 2011. On 27.10.2017, the girl surrendered before the police station. She divulged to the police that her father used to sexually assault her and her younger sister from their childhood. Based on the said disclosure, her father was arrested and he remained in custody for over 90 days. In the course of investigation, on 20.4.2018, the statement of the girl was recorded by the learned Magistrate. She stated that the allegations levelled by her
against her father was not true. According to her, it was at the instance of the applicant herein that such allegations were made BA:252/19 3 against her father. She went on to state that the applicant had abducted her from her home and he had subjected her to rape on 18.10.2017 and thereafter. Immediately thereafter, the applicant was roped in as the accused.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted
that in the original statement given by the victim before the police, when she had surrendered, she had no case that the applicant had subjected her to sexual abuse. According to the learned counsel, the victim is now housed at Nirbhaya centre. The learned counsel would refer to Annexure-A1 statement written by the victim and submitted that the girl had changed her version under pressure from her family members. It is further submitted that the victim has now attained majority and her inconsistent version may not be regarded as gospel truth to keep the applicant under incarceration.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that the girl has changed her version on more than one occasions. It is submitted that the allegations levelled against the applicant are extremely grave.
6. I have considered the submissions advanced and perused the case diary. It appears from records that the applicant has been in BA:252/19 4
custody from 14.11.2018 onwards. The investigation appears to have progressed to the final stages. The victim does not have a consisent version. Even after her 164 statement, she has changed her version and her case now is that she was made to level false accusations against the applicant. Having regard to the nature of the accusations, the period of detention undergone and the stage of investigation, I am of the view that by imposing stringent conditions, the applicant can be released on bail.
In the result, this application will stand allowed. The applicant shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction. The above
order shall be subject to the following conditions:
1). The applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Saturdays between 10 a.m. and 1 p.m., for two months or till final report is filed, whichever is earlier. 2). He shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence. He shall not contact the victim or her family members. 3). He shall not commit any similar offence while on bail.
BA:252/19 5 In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law. SD/- RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE KRJ //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE