Kerala High Court
Sangeeth vs The State Of Kerala on 19 February, 2018
Author: Sunil Thomas
Bench: Sunil Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
MONDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 30TH MAGHA, 1939
Bail Appl..No. 995 of 2018
--------------------------
CRIME NO.77/2018 OF POOYAPALLY POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
......
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
------------------
SANGEETH, AGED 27 YEARS,
S/O. SAHADEVAN, VADAKKE PANAYIL,
CHALAKKARA, NEAR CASHEW FACTORY,
PALLIMON VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV.SRI.P.V.DILEEP
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
-----------------------
THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM - 682 031.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AJITH MURALI
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 19-02-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
mbr/
SUNIL THOMAS, J.
------------------------------
B.A.No.995 of 2018
--------------------------------
Dated this the 19th day of February, 2018
ORDER
This application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. The petitioner herein is the sole accused in Crime No.77 of 2018 of the Pooyappally Police Station, registered for offence punishable under Section 376 of the IPC and Section 3 read with Section 4, 7 read with section 8, 5(1) (n) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.
3. It is alleged by the prosecution that the petitioner herein enticed a 14 year old young girl and raped her. When she was found missing her grand mother laid a complaint whereupon the Crime was registered. Later she was found in the company of the petitioner herein. She was produced before the Magistrate and her statement is recorded. The petitioner is in custody since 14.1.2018. He seeks bail.
4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner and the de facto complainant were in love and that he has not committed any offence. It appears that the B.A.No.995 of 2018 2 statement of the victim and the medical records support the prosecution case. Considering the age of the victim, if established, it can indicate a statutory rape.
5. Having considered the fact that the investigation has substantially progressed and Sec.164 Cr.P.C statement of the victim has been recorded, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner notwithstanding the objection raised by the learned Public Prosecutor, on the following conditions.
(i) Petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Sixty thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
(ii) He shall surrender his passport, if not surrendered already, within seven days from the date of his release and if he is not holding the passport, he shall file an affidavit within seven days. Further direction to release of the passport can be made by the trial court.
(ii) He shall appear before the investigating officer on all Tuesdays between 9 am and 10 am for a period of two months or till the final report is filed whichever is earlier.
(iii)He shall not enter the limits of the Pooyappalli B.A.No.995 of 2018 3 police station during the above period, except for the compliance of the above condition or for appearance in a court of law, wherein his presence is absolutely essential. However, in case of extreme emergency, he may enter the limits with the prior permission in writing of the jurisdictional Court in this crime.
(iii) He shall not get involved in any other identical offences and the involvement if any, will be a ground for seeking cancellation of bail.
(vi) He shall not threaten, coerce or intimidate the defacto complainant and the witnesses nor shall he interfere in the process of investigation.
Sd/-
SUNIL THOMAS, J.
JUDGE //True Copy\\ P.A to Judge IAP