Kerala High Court
Shafeeque vs State Of Kerala on 22 September, 2020
Author: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
Bench: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 31ST BHADRA, 1942
Bail Appl..No.5312 OF 2020
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 1240/2020 DATED 19-06-2020 OF
DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM
CRIME NO.433/2020 OF MARADU POLICE STATION , Ernakulam
PETITIONER:
SHAFEEQUE,
AGED 28, SON OF SHOUKKATH, PARAYIL HOUSE, NETTOOR,
MARADU P.O., ERNAKULAM
686601
BY ADV. SRI.K.V.SABU, CGC
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM
682031
SRI BIMAL K NATH, SR GP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.09.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl..No.5312 OF 2020 2
ORDER
This application is filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.
2. The applicant herein is the accused in Crime No.433 of 2020 of the Maradu Police Station registered under Sections 4, 3(a), 21, 17 and 16 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Section 77 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) of Children Act, 2015 and Sections 366A, 107, 376(2)(i) and 506 of the IPC.
3. The victim in the instant case is a minor child aged 16 years. The applicant is her neighbour. In her statement to the police, she alleges that the applicant handed over ganja and she was persuaded to smoke the same. On another occasion, when the girl refused, the applicant is alleged to have threatened her that he would disclose the earlier incident to others and she was persuaded to smoke the same. After about two days, one Sathar called him and she was asked to come to an apartment at Thykoodam. When she refused, he is alleged to have told her that the incident involving the applicant would be made public. The child is alleged to have gone to the apartment and she was subjected to sexual abuse by the said accused. The specific allegation against the applicant is that he had abetted and facilitated the acts of the 1st accused. Bail Appl..No.5312 OF 2020 3
4. Sri.K.V.Sabu, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the applicant herein was in a relationship with one Densy. The family members of the applicant filed a complaint before the Maradu police station seeking intervention. Later, the complaint was withdrawn as the applicant had to be admitted in a deaddiction centre at Thodupuzha. He contends that thereafter Densy was in enimical terms with the family of the applicant. It was thereafter that the 1st accused Sathar was arrested for abusing the child of Smt. Delfi, the sister of Densy. Due to previous enmity, false accusations are now levelled against the applicant.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer. He has made available the statement of the minor child recorded by the learned Magistrate under Section 25 of the POCSO Act. He would contend that serious accusations are levelled against the applicant herein and it cannot at this juncture be said that the allegations against the applicant are frivolous and vexatious. He points out that the applicant is a drug addict who had supplied contraband to a minor child and facilitated sexual abuse upon her by an elder man.
6. I have considered the submissions advanced. I have also gone through the statement of the minor child. There are clear materials linking the applicant herein with the crime. The investigation has only commenced and the contentions now advanced by the applicant cannot be accepted. Bail Appl..No.5312 OF 2020 4 Having regard to the gravity of accusations, the age of the victim and the stage of investigation, I find no reason to grant an order of pre-arrest bail to the applicant.
This application will stand dismissed.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE sru