Kerala High Court
Ajith vs State Of Kerala on 16 April, 2024
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 27TH CHAITHRA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 3095 OF 2024
CRIME NO.177/2024 OF MALAYINKEEZH POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 05.04.2024 IN CRMP NO.750 OF 2024 OF
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT (ATROCITIES & SEXUAL
VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN & CHILDREN),THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
AJITH
AGED 25 YEARS, S/O. SIMMON,
KAITHAKUZHI, VEKOTTUKONAM, KIZHAKKINKARA PUTHEN VEEDU,
MAILACHAL, DALUMUGHAM.P.O., NOW RESIDING AT AGAPPAVILA,
MAILACHAL, DALUMUGHAM.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695 125.
BY ADVS.
K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN
N.P.ASHA
RESPONDENT/STATE:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
PIN - 682 031.
BY ADV. SEENA C (PP)
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.3095/2024 2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
----------------------------------------
B.A.No.3095 of 2024
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 16th day of April, 2024
ORDER
This Bail Application is filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code.
2. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No. 177/2024 of Malayinkeezhu Police Station. The above case is registered against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Sections 8 r/w 7, 10 r/w 9(m)(n) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).
3. The victim in this case is a minor boy aged 10 years and he was studying in 5 th standard at the time of the incident. The petitioner is a close relative of the victim and he went to the house of the victim for the funeral ceremony of his sister. On 13-02-2024, the petitioner took the victim to a bedroom, and forcefully hold his buttocks and inappropriately touched his private parts. Hence, it is alleged that the accused committed the offences.
4. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted B.A.No.3095/2024 3 that the allegation against the petitioner is not correct and the petitioner is ready to abide any condition, if this Court grant him bail. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted that very serious allegations are against the petitioner.
5. Admittedly the petitioner is a relative of the victim. It is true that the allegation against the petitioner is very serious. But the case is to be proved though oral evidence. The continued incarceration of the petitioner is not necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case. Since, the petitioner is a close relative, there can be a direction to the petitioner not to enter the jurisdictional limit of the Police Station for a period of 30 days, so that the investigation can continue. The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer as and when required.
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.
B.A.No.3095/2024 4
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:
i. 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.
ii. 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.
iii. Petitioner shall not leave India without permission of the jurisdictional Court.
iv. 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.
v. The petitioner shall not enter the jurisdictional limit of Malayinkeezhu Police Station for a period of 30 days. But I B.A.No.3095/2024 5 make it clear that the petitioner can appear before the investigating officer as and when directed. The petitioner shall furnish his address and phone number to the investigating officer within two days from the date of release.
vi. 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.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, JUDGE ats