Kerala High Court
Xxxxxxxxx vs State Of Kerala on 14 August, 2025
2025:KER:60823
Crl.M.C.Nos.4689/2025 & 5152/2025 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.GIRISH
THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 23RD SRAVANA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 4689 OF 2025
CRIME NO.1492/2024 OF Aranmula Police Station, Pathanamthitta
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.05.2025 IN CRMP NO.3549 OF
2025 OF SPECIAL COURT UNDER POCSO ACT, PATHANAMTHITTA
PETITIONER/PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2:
XXX XXX XX
XXX XXXXX XXXX XXXXX XX XXXXX XXXX XXXX
BY ADVS.
SHRI.SUSANTH SHAJI
SHRI.SIDHARTH O.
SHRI.ALBIN A. JOSEPH
SMT.NEKHA VARGHESE
SMT.PARVATHY T.M.
SHRI.ANWIN JOHN ANTONY
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/STATE:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF ARANMULA POLICE
STATION, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
SRI SUDHEER.G, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.08.2025, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.5152/2025, THE COURT ON
14.08.2025 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:60823
Crl.M.C.Nos.4689/2025 & 5152/2025 2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.GIRISH
THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 23RD SRAVANA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 5152 OF 2025
CRIME NO.1492/2024 OF ARANMULA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 10.06.2025 IN CRMP NO.3753 OF
2025 OF SPECIAL COURT UNDER POCSO ACT, PATHANAMTHITTA
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2:
XXXXXXXXX
XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX
BY ADVS.
SHRI.SUSANTH SHAJI
SHRI.SIDHARTH O.
SHRI.ALBIN A. JOSEPH
SMT.NEKHA VARGHESE
SMT.PARVATHY T.M.
SHRI.ANWIN JOHN ANTONY
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF ARANMULA POLICE
STATION, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
SMT PUSHPALATHA M.K., SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.08.2025, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.4689/2025, THE COURT ON
14.08.2025 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:60823
Crl.M.C.Nos.4689/2025 & 5152/2025 3
ORDER
The second accused in Crime No.1492/2024 of Aranmula Police Station has filed these petitions challenging two orders passed by the Additional Sessions Court-I (Special Court), Pathanamthitta, in connection with the bail granted to her in the said crime. Crl.M.C No.4689/2025 is directed against the order dated 16.05.2025 in Crl.M.P No.3549/2025 whereby the learned Special Judge had refused to lift the second condition in the bail order dated 07.04.2025. Crl.M.C No.5152/2025 is against the order dated 10.06.2025 in Crl.M.P No.3753/2025, as per which the learned Special Judge cancelled the bail granted to the petitioner herein for her alleged violation of the condition to appear before the Investigating Officer.
2. The offences involved in the case are under Sections 363, 366A, 376(2)(f), 376(2)(n), 376(3), 377 and 506 I.P.C r/w Section 34 I.P.C and Sections 3(a) r/w 4(2), 3(b) r/w 4(2), 5(l) r/w 6, 5(i) r/w 6, 5(p) r/w 6, 7 r/w 8, 9(l) r/w 10, 9(p) r/w 10, 11(4) r/w 12 and 16 r/w 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Sections 75 and 77 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The petitioner/second accused was arrested on 2025:KER:60823 Crl.M.C.Nos.4689/2025 & 5152/2025 4 22.12.2024 and remanded to judicial custody. She was granted statutory default bail subject to conditions, on 07.04.2025, as per order in Crl.M.P No.3151/2025 of the learned Special Judge. The second condition imposed was that she has to appear before the Investigating Officer on all Tuesdays between 9:00 a.m and 11:00 a.m for three months, or until the final report is filed, whichever be earlier.
3. The petitioner filed Crl.M.P No.3549/2025 to lift the above condition requiring attendance before the Investigating Officer mainly on medical grounds stating the reason that due to ear balancing problem, she cannot remain waiting at the police station for long hours. It was further alleged that the Investigating Officer has been unnecessarily harassing her by using obscene language and threatening her to sign on certain papers. The above petition was dismissed by the learned Special Judge stating the reason that there was no evidence to show that the petitioner was suffering from the ailment related to ear balance, and hence the reason stated by her in the above regard, cannot be accepted. It was further observed by accepting the contention of the prosecution that the investigation is not over and the investigating agency was in need of checking some electronic records to unearth evidence.
2025:KER:60823 Crl.M.C.Nos.4689/2025 & 5152/2025 5
4. It is thereafter that, the prosecution moved Crl.M.P No.3753/2025 before the learned Special Judge to cancel the bail of the petitioner stating the reason that she failed to appear before the Investigating Officer in compliance with the bail condition imposed by the Court. As per order dated 10.06.2025, the learned Special Judge accepted the above contention of the prosecution and cancelled her bail with the direction to issue non-bailable warrant for committing her to custody.
5. In the present petitions, the petitioner would contend that the learned Special Judge went wrong in passing both the above orders, without due application of mind.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.
7. Annexure-A1 certificate issued by an ENT Surgeon and Allergy Specialist of a Private Hospital at Adoor, is relied on by the petitioner to show that she was diagnosed as having acute positional vertigo. By relying on the said document, the learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the request of the petitioner to lift the bail condition requiring her appearance before the Investigating Officer was 2025:KER:60823 Crl.M.C.Nos.4689/2025 & 5152/2025 6 bona fide, and that the learned Special Judge has wrongly declined the request in the above regard.
8. As already stated, the second condition imposed by the learned Special Judge in the bail order was that the petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer on all Tuesdays between 9:00 a.m and 11:00 a.m for three months, or until final report is filed, whichever be earlier. It is pertinent to note that default bail was granted to the petitioner after a prolonged period of custody exceeding 90 days. It also appears that the petitioner was handed over to the custody of the Investigating Officer for a sufficiently long period for the collection of evidence. In that view of the matter, it cannot be said that the further appearance of the petitioner before the Investigating Officer was required for the collection of evidence. Taking into account the above aspect, along with the contention of the petitioner on the basis of Annexure-A1 about the ailment of acute positional vertigo suffered by her, I am of the view that the retention of the bail condition requiring appearance of the petitioner before the Investigating Officer was not necessary. That apart, it is to be noted that the three months period prescribed by the learned Special Judge has expired on 07.07.2025. Thus, the prayer of the petitioner to lift the bail condition requiring her 2025:KER:60823 Crl.M.C.Nos.4689/2025 & 5152/2025 7 attendance before the Investigating Officer has to be taken as just and reasonable.
9. As regards the cancellation of bail of the second accused, it is to be noted that the impugned order passed by the learned Special Judge does not contain any indication as to the precise dates when the petitioner failed to appear before the Investigating Officer. So also, the impugned order is silent as to the reason which the petitioner pointed out for the non-compliance of the above bail condition, and a finding with reasoning that the reason so stated was unacceptable. Thus, it is apparent that the learned Special Judge had cancelled the bail in a mechanical manner. That being so, the order so passed by the learned Special Judge, is liable to be set aside. As a conclusion to the above discussion, I find that both these petitions filed by the petitioner are to be allowed.
In the result, the petitions stand allowed as follows:
i) The bail condition No.(2) imposed by the Special Court directing the appearance of the petitioner/second accused before the Investigating Officer stands lifted.
2025:KER:60823 Crl.M.C.Nos.4689/2025 & 5152/2025 8
ii) The order dated 10.06.2025 of the learned Special Judge in Crl.M.P No.3753/2025 cancelling the bail of the petitioner/second accused in Crime No.1492/2024 is hereby set aside.
iii) The petitioner/second accused is permitted to continue on bail as per the order dated 07.04.2025 of the learned Special Judge.
iv) If the petitioner/second accused has been arrested and detained in custody, she shall be released forthwith.
(sd/-)
G. GIRISH, JUDGE
jsr
2025:KER:60823
Crl.M.C.Nos.4689/2025 & 5152/2025 9
APPENDIX IN CRL.MC NO.5152/2025
ANNEXURE-A1 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DTD.20.5.2025, ISSUED BY
DR.NIKHUL MATHEW JOHN, ENT SURGEON AND ALLERGY SPECIALIST, THE LIFELINE MULTISPECIALTY HOSPITAL, ADOOR TO THE PETITIONER. ANNEXURE-A2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE S.P OF PATHANAMTHITTA ON 12.5.2025 AGAINST THE HARASSMENT BY DY.SP ANNEXURE-A3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE D.G.P., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, ON 12/5/2025, AGAINST THE ILL TREATMENT OF DY.S.P., PATHANAMTHITTA.
ANNEXURE-A4 TRUE COPY OF THE SAID ORDER DATED 16/5/2025 IN CRL.M.P NO.3549/2025 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT-I, PATHANAMTHITTA.
ANNEXURE-A5 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE BAIL DISMISSAL ORDER IN CRL.M.P NO.3753/2025 DATED 10/6/2025 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE-I (SPECIAL COURT), PATHANAMTHITTA.
2025:KER:60823
Crl.M.C.Nos.4689/2025 & 5152/2025 10
APPENDIX IN CRL.MC NO.4689/2025
ANNEXURE-A1 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DTD.20.5.2025, ISSUED BY
DR.NIKHUL MATHEW JOHN, ENT SURGEON AND ALLERGY SPECIALIST, THE LIFELINE MULTISPECIALTY HOSPITAL, ADOOR TO THE PETITIONER. ANNEXURE-A2 TRUE COPY OF THE ABOVE SAID COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE S.P OF PATHANAMTHITTA ON 12.5.2025 AGAINST THE HARASSMENT BY DY.SP ANNEXURE-A3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE D.G.P., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, ON 12/5/2025, AGAINST THE ILL TREATMENT OF DY.S.P., PATHANAMTHITTA.
ANNEXURE-A4 TRUE COPY OF THE SAID ORDER DATED 16/5/2025 IN CRL.M.P NO.3549/2025 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT-I, PATHANAMTHITTA.