Kerala High Court
Aby vs State Of Kerala on 31 July, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
2025:KER:56766
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JULY 2025 / 9TH SRAVANA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 8648 OF 2025
CRIME NO.363/2025 OF CHENGANNOOR POLICE STATION,
ALAPPUZHA AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 26.06.2025 IN
BAIL APPL. NO.7709 OF 2025 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
PETITIONER:
ABY,
AGED 30 YEARS,
S/O LATE BABY, PUTUKEEZHI PUTHUVAL VEEDU,
ALA VADAKKUMURI, ALA VILLAGE,
CHENGANOOR TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT,
PIN - 689 121.
BY ADV SHRI.V.BIJU JOSEPH
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031.
SMT. SREEJA V., PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
31.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl. No.8648 of 2025
2025:KER:56766
-2-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
--------------------------------------
Bail Appl. No.8648 of 2025
------------------------------------
Dated this the 31st day of July, 2025
ORDER
This bail application is filed under section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS').
2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.363 of 2025 of Chengannur Police Station, Alappuzha, registered for the offences punishable under sections 332(b), 118(1), 74, 75(1)(i), 76, 64(1) and 65(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS') and Sections 4(1), 4(2) r/w Section 3(b), 8 and 7 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
3. According to the prosecution, on 20.03.2025 at about 10 a.m., the accused, who is a neighbour of the victim, trespassed into her house and committed penetrative sexual assault on her and thereby committed the offences alleged. Petitioner was arrested on 22.03.2025 and he has been in custody since then.
4. Heard Sri.Biju Joseph V., the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as Smt.Sreeja V., the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the entire prosecution allegations are false and that the incident as alleged Bail Appl. No.8648 of 2025 2025:KER:56766 -3- had not occurred. It was also submitted that since the final report has already been filed and petitioner has been in custody from 22.05.2025 onwards, his further detention is not necessary. The learned Counsel further submitted that from the medical report, it is revealed that the hymen of the victim is intact and also that she had not alleged any penetrative sexual assault, in her statement to the Doctor. The learned counsel also pointed out that the earlier bail application filed as B.A.No.7709 of 2025 was dismissed by this Court on 26.06.2025 and more than a month has passed, since the said dismissal and hence, further custody ought not to be permitted. It was also submitted that the petitioner is only 30 years in age and that he is willing to abide by any condition that may be imposed.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, opposed the bail application and submitted that petitioner had molested the 15 year old victim after dragging her into a room and committed penetrative sexual assault on her. It was also submitted that the contention regarding absence of penetrative sexual assault is without any basis. It was also pointed out that merely because the hymen is intact, it does not mean that there was no penetrative sexual assault and further that petitioner being a neighbour, releasing him on bail would cause serious prejudice to the prosecution case, notwithstanding the filing of FIR. It was also submitted that, since the Bail Appl. No.8648 of 2025 2025:KER:56766 -4- earlier bail application was dismissed there are no change of circumstances pointed out to petitioner released him on bail.
7. I have considered the rival contentions.
8. Petitioner is alleged to have assaulted the de facto complainant and, after tearing her clothes, grabbed her breasts and inserted his fingers into her private parts for about 20 minutes. The medical report mentioned that the hymen was not torn. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner had raised a contention that, if there was any act as alleged, there would have been traces of skin cells and sweat containing the secondary DNA of the petitioner and, since there is no such indication petitioner ought to be given the benefit of doubt, those are not matters which this Court need to consider at this stage, that too in a bail application. Further, the contention raised by the petitioner is not supported by any material which this Court could rely upon, atleast at this stage.
9. Be that as it may, though the petitioner is alleged to have committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim, who was aged only 15 years and considering the period of custody undergone by the petitioner from 22.03.2025, and also the circumstances that the final report has already been filed and further that the hymen of the victim has not torn as per the medical report, I am of the view that further custody will amount to punishment before conviction. Bail Appl. No.8648 of 2025
2025:KER:56766 -5-
10. Having regard to the circumstances mentioned above, I deem it appropriate to release the petitioner on bail .
In the result, this application is allowed on the following conditions:-
(a) Petitioner shall be released on bail on him 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 court having jurisdiction.
(b) Petitioner shall co-operate with the trial of the case.
(c) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he attempt to tamper with the evidence or contact the victim or her family members.
(d) Petitioner shall not enter into the jurisdictional limits of the Police Station where the victim resides.
(e) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is on bail.
(f) Petitioner shall not leave the country without the permission of the jurisdictional Court.
In case of violation of any of the above conditions or if any modification or deletion of the conditions are required, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider such applications, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE ADS Bail Appl. No.8648 of 2025 2025:KER:56766 -6- APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 8648/2025 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN CRL.M.P. 723/2025 DATED 30.04.2025 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT -1 ALAPPUZHA.
Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN CRL.M.P. 1007/2025 DATED 04.06.2025 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT -1 ALAPPUZHA.
Annexure A3 ORDER DATED 26-06-2025 IN BAIL
APPL.7709/2025 ON HIGH COURT.