BAIL APPL. NO. 2637 OF 2022 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF MAY 2022 / 16TH VAISAKHA, 1944
BAIL APPL. NO. 2637 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CMP 185/2022 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
COURT & SESSIONS COURT (VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN & CHILDREN)
PETITIONER/S:
JINU P.P.
AGED 32 YEARS
S/O. LATE PATHROSE,PARAPPURATH HOUSE,CHALAPPURAM
COLONY,PIRAVOM KARA,PIRAVOM VILLAGE,MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK,
PIN - 686664
BY ADVS.
GEORGE SEBASTIAN
M.D.SIMY
RESPONDENT/S:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA,ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
OTHER PRESENT:
ADV SREEJA V- SR P.P
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 2637 OF 2022 2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
===================
B.A.No. 2637 of 2022
-------------------------------
Dated this the 6th 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.185 of 2022 of Piravom Police Station, Ernakulam District. The above case is registered against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Secs. 323, 354, 363, 354 D(1)(i) and 376(1) of the IPC and also under Secs. 4 r/w 3(a) and 12 r/w 11(iv) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
3. The prosecution case is that the accused fell in love with the victim girl aged 17 years and on a day in BAIL APPL. NO. 2637 OF 2022 3 May 2021, at about 10 am in the Piravom Valiya Palli compound, the accused has beaten on the cheeks of the victim causing pain. Thereafter, on a day in October 2021, the accused has taken the victim girl in his motorcycle from Pallikavala, Piravom to Aattutheeram Park and thereafter to his house near Pallikavala temple. It is alleged that the accused has forcefully and ignoring the resistance of the victim committed rape on her. It is also alleged that the accused has constantly followed the victim and published the photographs between himself and the victim causing mental sufferings to her. The petitioner was arrested on 23.2.2022.
4. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor.
5. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in custody from 23.2.2022 onwards. The counsel submitted that even if the entire allegations are accepted, the offence is not made out. The counsel also BAIL APPL. NO. 2637 OF 2022 4 submitted that even though the prosecution claims that the victim is aged 17, she actually crossed 18 years. The counsel also submitted that the investigation of the case is almost over. The counsel also submitted that it is clear from the statement of the victim in the case that the victim fell in love with the accused and the victim used to contact him regularly. The Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the bail application.The Public Prosecutor submitted that there is prima facie evidence to show that the accused committed the offence. The Public Prosecutor submitted that this Court may not release the petitioner on bail at this stage. It is true that the allegation against the petitioner is very serious. But the petitioner is in custody from 22.3.2022. I perused the prosecution case carefully and I do not want to make any further observation about the merit of the case because the same is to be considered by the trial court at the appropriate stage. The investigation of the case is almost over. In such circumstances, indefinite BAIL APPL. NO. 2637 OF 2022 5 incarceration of the petitioner may not be necessary. The petitioner can be directed to appear before the investigating officer, till final report is filed. With the above condition, the bail application can be allowed.
6. 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 inasmuch 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.
7. 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 BAIL APPL. NO. 2637 OF 2022 6 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. 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.
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 BAIL APPL. NO. 2637 OF 2022 7 accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
5. The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer on all Mondays and Fridays at 10 a.m., till final report is filed.
6. 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 SKS