IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF MAY 2022 / 14TH VAISAKHA, 1944
BAIL APPL. NO. 3225 OF 2022
CRIME NO.255/2022 OF Palakkad Town South Police Station, Palakkad
PETITIONER:
NATARAJAN
AGED 67 YEARS
SON OF VELAYUDHAN, PUZHAKKAL HOUSE,
KANNADI (P.O), KANNADI PANCHAYATH,
KANNADI VILLAGE, PALAKKAD TALUK,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT., PIN - 678701
BY ADV NIREESH MATHEW
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
SMT.SREEJA V, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 3225 OF 2022
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------
B.A.No.3225 of 2022
-------------------------------
Dated this the 4th day of May, 2022
ORDER
This Bail Application is filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code.
2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.255 of 2022 of Town South Police Station, Palakkad. The above case is registered alleging offences punishable under the Indian Penal Code offences and also under Section 8 read with 7 of the POCSO Act. Petitioner was arrested on 27.03.2022 and he is in custody.
3. The prosecution case is that on 27.03.2022 at 4 pm when the survivor was on her way back from school, she went to the shop run by the accused. It is alleged that the accused who is in his sixties subjected the survivor to sexual assault by touching the vagina over her bottom with sexual intend and also alleging that the accused asked the survivor to remove her face mask and showed thumps up BAIL APPL. NO. 3225 OF 2022 3 sign. Hence it is alleged that the accused committed the offence.
4. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody from 27.03.2022. The counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the petitioner has not committed the offence. The counsel further submitted that the investigation of the case is almost over and the continued custody of the petitioner is not necessary. The learned Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the bail application. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the victim in this case is a minor and the petitioner sexually abused the victim. The Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner may not be released on bail at this stage. It is true that the allegation against the petitioner is very serious. The petitioner is aged 67 and the victim is a minor girl. On considering the period of detention and also the progress in the investigation, I think the continued detention of the petitioner may not be necessary. But the BAIL APPL. NO. 3225 OF 2022 4 apprehension of the prosecution that the petitioner will influence the witness is also to be considered. The same can be redressed by directing the petitioner not to enter the jurisdiction of Town South Police Station, Palakkad till the investigation of the case is over. If the petitioner violates the same, the victim or the prosecution is free to approach the jurisdictional court to cancel the bail order. The investigation officer will inform the victim or her authorized person about the conditions imposed by this Court while granting bail.
5. Moreover, it is a well accepted principle that the bail is the rule and the jail is the exception. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Chidambaram. P v Directorate of Enforcement (2019 (16) SCALE 870), after considering all the earlier judgments, observed that, the basic jurisprudence relating to bail remains the same in as much as the grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception so as to ensure that the accused has the opportunity of securing fair trial.
BAIL APPL. NO. 3225 OF 2022 5
6. Considering the dictum laid down in the above decision and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Bail Application is allowed with the following directions:
1. 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.
2. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required. The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.
BAIL APPL. NO. 3225 OF 2022 6
3. Petitioner shall not leave India without permission of the jurisdictional Court.
4. Petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
5. If any of the above conditions are violated by the petitioner, the jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in accordance to law, even though the bail is granted by this Court. The prosecution and the victim are at liberty to approach the jurisdictional court to cancel the bail, if there is any violation of the above conditions.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, JUDGE np BAIL APPL. NO. 3225 OF 2022 7 APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 3225/2022 PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES Annexure 1 TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE-I (SPECIAL JUDGE), PALAKKAD IN CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO.1004/2022 DATED 18.04.2022 RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: NIL