Kerala High Court
Sivakumar S, @ Sreekumar vs State Of Kerala on 25 June, 2024
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 4TH ASHADHA, 1946
BAIL APPL.NO.3908 OF 2024
CRIME NO.290/2024 OF Kareelakulangara Police Station, Alappuzha
--------------
PETITIONER/A1 :-
SIVAKUMAR S @ SREEKUMAR, AGED 42 YEARS
S/O.SASIDHARAN NAIR, PADMAVILASAM HOUSE
CHINGOLI P.O, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690 532
BY ADVS.
K.S.ARUN KUMAR
AMRUTHA K P
AMRUTHA P S
VIJAY SANKAR V.H.
JERIN JOSEPH
ARYA B. VENUGOPAL
ELDHO BABY
AYISHA RIFATH K.
AMRUTHA P.S.
RESPONDENT :-
STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031
BY SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK, SR.PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL.NO.3908 OF 2024
-: 2 :-
ORDER
Dated this the 25th day of June, 2024 The application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for an order of pre-arrest bail.
2. The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.290/2024 of the Kareelakulangara Police Station, Alappuzha, which is registered against him, for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 447, 341, 506 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The crux of the prosecution case is that; on 24.04.2024, at around 16.30 hrs., the accused went to the house of the de facto complainant/victim to enquire about a property transaction that was published on the OLX application by the victim, the accused groped the breasts of the victim and kissed on her neck. Thus, the accused has committed the above offences.
BAIL APPL.NO.3908 OF 2024 -: 3 :-
4. Heard; Sri.K.S.Arun Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.C.S.Hrithwik, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusations levelled against him. He has been falsely implicated in the crime. The petitioner had gone to the house of the de facto complainant pursuant to an advertisement that was published by her on the OLX application. It was only because the negotiation of the sale did not take place, there was an altercation between the parties and that the victim has falsely said that the petitioner has committed the offence under Section 354 of the IPC. The petitioner hails from a respected family and is an Ex-service man. The petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents. If the petitioner is incarcerated, he would suffer severe hardship and agony. Therefore, the petitioner may be granted an order of pre-arrest bail.
BAIL APPL.NO.3908 OF 2024 -: 4 :-
6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. He submitted that there are incriminating materials to substantiate the petitioner's involvement in the crime. The petitioner trespassed into the house of the victim and then outraged her modesty. The victim has given a 164 statement clearly narrating the incident that took place in her house. If the petitioner is granted an order of pre-arrest bail, it may hamper the investigation. Hence, the application may be dismissed.
7. On an analysis of the materials on record, it can be gathered that the victim had published an advertisement on the OLX application seeking for prospective buyers to purchase her house. Consequent to the advertisement, the petitioner had gone to her house to see the property. Admittedly, there were other persons in the house of the victim, when the petitioner visited the house. It is at that point of time, the victim alleges that the petitioner outraged her modesty by groping her breasts and also kissing her. Prima facie, there are no BAIL APPL.NO.3908 OF 2024 -: 5 :- materials to prove the assertion other than the statement of the victim. Yet these are all matters to be decided after trial. However, the allegation of trespass may not be attracted.
8. On an overall appreciation of the facts, the rival submissions made across the Bar and the materials placed on record, particularly on finding that there are no sufficient materials to substantiate the petitioner's involvement in the crime, though that is a matter to be investigated and decided at the time of trial, the petitioner's custodial interrogation is not necessary and the investigation in the case is practically complete, I am of the view that the petitioner has made out sufficient grounds to invoke the discretionary jurisdiction of this Court under Section 438 of the Code. Hence, I am inclined to allow the application.
In the result, the application is allowed, subject to the following conditions:
BAIL APPL.NO.3908 OF 2024 -: 6 :-
(i) The petitioner is directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer within 10 days from today.
(ii) In the event of the petitioner's arrest, the Investigating Officer shall release the petitioner on bail on him executing a bond for Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like amount each;
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation, as and when directed by the Investigating Officer.
(iv) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement or threat the victim or her witnesses or procure to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever;
(v) The petitioner shall surrender his passport before the jurisdictional court concerned within a period of one week from the date of his release on bail. If he has no passport, he shall BAIL APPL.NO.3908 OF 2024 -: 7 :- file an affidavit to the effect before the said court within the said period;
(vi) The petitioner shall not get involved in any other offence while he is on bail;
(vii) In case of violation of any of the conditions mentioned above, the jurisdictional court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the same, in accordance with law.
(viii) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall also be filed before the court below.
(ix) Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the information, if any, given by the petitioner even while the petitioner is on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another [2020 (1) KHC 663]. BAIL APPL.NO.3908 OF 2024 -: 8 :-
(x) The observations made in this order are only for the purpose of considering the application and the same shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case to be decided by competent Courts.
Sd/-
C.S. DIAS, JUDGE Jvt/26.6.2024 BAIL APPL.NO.3908 OF 2024 -: 9 :- APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 3908/2024 PETITIONER ANNEXURES :-
Annexure -I A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 290/2024 OF KAREELAKULANGARA POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, DATED 28.04.2024