Kerala High Court
Pramod M C vs State Of Kerala on 16 October, 2023
Author: P Gopinath
Bench: P Gopinath
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
MONDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 24TH ASWINA, 1945
BAIL APPL. NO. 6603 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
PRAMOD M C,
AGED 43 YEARS, S/O CHANDU, MANAPATTI, CHERUVAYOOR P O,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 673645
BY ADVS.
S.RAJEEV
V.VINAY
M.S.ANEER
SARATH K.P.
PRERITH PHILIP JOSEPH
ANILKUMAR C.R.
K.S.KIRAN KRISHNAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
PIN - 682031
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
KUTTIPURAM POLICE STATION, (CRIME NO 654/2023 OF
KUTTIPURAM POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN -
679571
BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI VIPIN NARAYAN (SR PP)
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A. No.6603/2023 -2-
ORDER
The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.654/2023 of Kuttipuram Police Station, Malappuram District alleging commission of offences under Sections 376 (2) (n), 376 (2)
(a) (ii) and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The said crime has now been re-registered as Crime No.3042/CB/MPM/R/2023 by the Crime Branch. The petitioner is a police officer (now under suspension).
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he befriended the victim over Facebook and after informing her that his existing marriage was on the verge of divorce entered into sexual relationships with her by promising to marry her. It is also alleged that he impregnated the victim and thereafter tried to compel the victim to abort the pregnancy. It is also alleged that when the victim refused to abort the pregnancy, the petitioner threatened her by telling her that he would kill her and thereby the petitioner committed the offences alleged against him.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that a reading of the first information statement of the victim will itself show that .the petitioner is in a subsisting marriage. It is submitted that in such circumstances, going by the decision of this court in Anilkumar v. State of Kerala; 2021 (2) KLT 82 and the decision of the Supreme Court in Shambu Kharwar v. State of Uttar Pradesh; 2022 (4) KLT OnLine 1174, there cannot be any allegation of rape on the promise of marriage. It is submitted that a reading of the first information statement is at best suggestive of a consensual relationship between two adults and that does not constitute an offence under the law. The learned counsel has also referred to certain photographs produced along with Crl. M.A No.1/2023 to contend that the petitioner and the victim were actually very close to each other and were in a consensual relationship.
B.A. No.6603/2023 -3-
4. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the grant of bail. It is submitted that the petitioner is a Circle Inspector of Police (now under suspension). It is submitted that while the allegations against the petitioner are serious, the fact that he is a fairly senior Police officer in the police force makes the allegation even more serious. It is submitted that though the petitioner has been placed under suspension, considering the nature of the allegations, it may note be conducive to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. It is however confirms that considering the fact that the petitioner is a police officer, the investigation has been taken over by the Crime Branch and is now being investigated by an officer in the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police.
5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am of the opinion that the petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail, subject to conditions. A reading of the first information statement of the victim shows that she was aware of the fact that the petitioner was in a subsisting marriage, though there is a further statement that the petitioner had informed her that the existing marriage was on the verge of divorce. Going by the law laid down in Anilkumar (surpa) and Shambu Kharwar (supra), it is clear that an allegation of rape based on the false promise of marriage may not sustain if the promise is made by a person in a subsisting marriage and this fact is known to the other party also. Whether the statement by the petitioner that his existing marriage was on the verge of divorce makes any difference to the law is a matter to be considered. The petitioner is already under suspension. The case has also been transferred to the Crime Branch and is being investigated by an officer in the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police. These two aspects are, in my view, sufficient safe guard to ensure that a proper investigation is conducted into the crime registered against the petitioner. As held by the Supreme Court in Suseela Agarwal and others v. State; (2020) 5 SCC 1 the petitioner shall be deemed to be in custody for the purposes of recovery etc. B.A. No.6603/2023 -4- In the result, this anticipatory bail application is allowed. It is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail, in the event of arrest in connection with Crime No.3042/CB/MPM/R/2023 of Crime Branch, Malappuram subject to the following conditions:-
(i) Petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer;
(ii) Petitioner shall report before the Investigating officer in Crime No.3042/CB/MPM/R/2023 of Crime Branch, Malappuram at 11 a.m on 20-10-2023 and 21-10-2023 and thereafter as and when called upon to do so;
(iii) Petitioner shall not attempt to contact the victim or interfere with the investigation or to influence or intimidate any witness in Crime No.3042/CB/MPM/R/2023 of Crime Branch, Malappuram;
(iv) Petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.
If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the Investigating officer in Crime No.3042/CB/MPM/R/2023 of Crime Branch, Malappuram may file an application before the jurisdictional Court for cancellation of bail.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P. JUDGE AMG