Kerala High Court
Sajeer vs State Of Kerala on 16 April, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 27TH CHAITHRA, 1946
CRL.A NO. 676 OF 2024
CRIME NO.126/2024 OF Kadakkal Police Station, Kollam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 12.02.2024 IN CMP NO.26 OF 2024
OF SPECIAL COURT- OFFENCES UNDER SC/ST (POA) ACT,1989,KOTTARAKKARA
APPELLANT/ACCUSED:
SAJEER
AGED 33 YEARS
S/O BASHEER, SAJEER MANZIL, VILAKADU, MADAVOOR P.O,
VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 673585
BY ADV LATHEESH SEBASTIAN
RESPONDENTS/STATE/COMPLAINANT/INJURED:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
PIN - 682031
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
KADAKKAL POLICE STATION, KOLLAM, PIN - 691536
3 DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
KOTTARAKARA, KOLLAM, PIN - 691506
4 XXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI E.C. BINEESH-PP
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.A.No. 676 of 2024
..2..
is
J U D G M E N T
Dated this the 16th day of April, 2024 One among the offenses canvassed against the appellant/accused is under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2015. Notice has already been served on the victim. However, there is no representation.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the Public Prosecutor.
3. The allegation is that the appellant committed rape on the 4th respondent by extending a promise of marriage on 24.01.2024. The 4th respondent is a person having 45% disability. Accordingly, the appellant is alleged to have committed offenses under Section 354A, 366, 376(1), 376(2)(1) of the Indian Penal Code; under Section 92(b) of the Crl.A.No. 676 of 2024 ..3..
is Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act and also under Section 3(1)(w)(i) and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act. The appellant was arrested on 27.01.2024 and he was in custody till today.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor, this Court is of the opinion that, no useful purpose is to be served by incarcerating the appellant any more. The purpose of investigation/interrogation should have been amply served by this time. The appellant has been in the custody for the passed more than 80 days.
5. In these circumstances, this Criminal Appeal is allowed and the appellant is directed to be enlarged on bail subject to the following conditions:
i) The appellant shall execute a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Crl.A.No. 676 of 2024 ..4..
is Thousand Only) with two solvent sureties, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial court.
ii) The appellant shall appear before the Investigating Officer once in a week on Saturdays for a period of one month, and thereafter, once in two weeks on alternate saturdays for a further period of one month, and thereafter, as and when required by the Investigating Officer to do so in writing.
iii) The appellant shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses. Nor he shall tamper with the evidence.
iv) The appellant shall not indulge any similar crime while released on bail.
v) The appellant shall fully co-operate with the investigation.
Sd/-
C. JAYACHANDRAN JUDGE TR