Kerala High Court
Sreehari A. V vs State Of Kerala on 17 January, 2025
2025:KER:3558
B.A.No.10/2025
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.GIRISH
FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 27TH POUSHA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO.10 OF 2025
CRIME NO.788/2024 OF CHOTTANIKKARA POLICE STATION,
ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
SREEHARI A. V.,
AGED 23 YEARS, S/O. KUNJIRAMAN, ALLAMKODU(H),
VELESHWARAM P.O,PULLUR, HARIPURAM VILLAGE,
KASARGOD, PIN - 671316
BY ADVS.
JISSMON A KURIAKOSE
SIDHARTHAN M.T.
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
BY ADV
SRI NOUSHAD KA, SR PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
17.01.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:3558
B.A.No.10/2025
-2-
G. GIRISH, J.
--------------------------------
B.A.No.10 of 2025
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 17th day of January, 2025
ORDER
This Bail Application is filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
2. The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.788 of 2024 of Chottanikkara Police Station, Ernakulam District, registered alleging commission of the offences punishable under Sections 329(3), 137(2) 63(a), 63(b), 64, 75(2) and 76 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 and Sections 4, 3, 8 and 7 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
3. The prosecution case is that, the petitioner, who was having acquaintance with the survivor for the past several years, committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon her at about 3.30 pm on 05.11.2024 at her house. Thereafter, on 07.11.2024, the petitioner is said to have kidnapped the survivor and left the place along with her. After wandering for two days in Kozhikode beach, they were traced by the police and taken into custody. Based on the aforesaid allegations, the present crime has been registered.
2025:KER:3558 B.A.No.10/2025 -3-
4. The petitioner was arrested on 10.11.2024 and remanded to judicial custody. The bail application filed by the petitioner was rejected by the Special Judge for POCSO offences, Muvattupuzha as per order dated 18.12.2024.
5. Notice has been duly served to the guardian of the survivor.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the respondent.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is aged 23 years and he is suffering from Intellectual disability due to the consequences of Endosulfan menace. Annexure - 3 Certificate of Disability is produced in support of the aforesaid contention. It is also submitted that the survivor had no case that the petitioner committed any act against her will, and that she had fully co-operated with the petitioner while they left the place on 07.11.2024. It is further contended that the petitioner and the survivor were having contact for the past several years and that the survivor strongly desired to marry the petitioner.
8. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner in the above regard are no excuse for the crime committed by the petitioner. It is pointed out that since the offence is aggregative penetrative sexual assault, the petitioner deserves 2025:KER:3558 B.A.No.10/2025 -4- no leniency.
9. As already stated above, the petitioner has been in custody since 10.11.2024. The investigation in this case is already over, and the final report has been filed before the competent court. The prolonged custody of the petitioner is not required for any purpose of investigation. It is true that the offence alleged against the petitioner is of very serious nature. However, the circumstances under which the crime is committed, especially in the context of the friendship between the petitioner and the survivor for the past several years and also the act of the survivor, who voluntarily left her house along with the petitioner on 07.11.2024, cannot be ignored. Taking into account the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the prolonged detention of the petitioner in custody is not required. The petitioner is entitled to be released on bail subject to stringent conditions.
In the result, the bail application stands allowed with the following conditions :
i. The petitioner shall be released on bail on 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 jurisdictional Court.
2025:KER:3558 B.A.No.10/2025 -5- ii. Petitioner shall not leave India without permission of the jurisdictional Court. iii. The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected to have committed.
iv. The petitioner shall not enter into Ernakulam District or make any effort to contact the survivor.
v. If any of the above conditions are violated by the petitioner, the jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in accordance with law, even though the bail is granted by this Court. The prosecution and the defacto complainant are at liberty to approach the jurisdictional court to cancel the bail, if there is any violation of the above conditions. Sd/-
G. GIRISH JUDGE ded 2025:KER:3558 B.A.No.10/2025 -6- APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 10/2025 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NUMBER 775/2024 OF CHOTTANIKKARA POLICE STATION Annexure 2 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIS Annexure 3 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE Annexure 4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18/12/2024 IN CRL MC 132/2024 ON THE FILES OF HON'BLE SPECIAL COURT FOR ATROCITIES AGAINST WOMEN AND CHILDREN, MUVATTUPUZHA