Kerala High Court
Johnson A.G @ Baiju vs State Of Kerala on 8 July, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.
THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 17TH ASHADHA, 1943
BAIL APPL. NO. 4908 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CMP 954/2021 OF FAST TRACK
SPECIAL COURT, KALPETTA, WAYANAD
PETITIONER/ACCUSED
JOHNSON A.G @ BAIJU
AGED 36 YEARS
S/O. GEORGE, AALINKAL HOUSE, OORKKADAVE, IRULAM,
IRULAM VILLAGE, WAYANAD, KERALA 673 596.
BY ADV JIKKU SEBAN GEORGE
RESPONDENT/STATE
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KENICHIRA,
WAYANAD DISTRICT, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH
COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 018.
OTHER PRESENT:
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI AJITH MURALI
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 4908 OF 2021 2
ORDER
Application for regular bail is filed by the petitioner in Crime
No.598 of 2020 of Kenichira police station, Wayanad District registered
for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 354(A)(2) read with
354(A)(1)(i) and (ii), 376(2)(f), 376 (2)(n), 376(3) and 506 of the
Indian Penal Code, Section 6 read with Section 5(l) and (n), Section 10
read with Section 9(1) and (n), Section 12 read with Section 11(v) ,
13(1), 14(1) and (2) and Section 15(1) and (2) of the Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act, Section 66E and Section 67(B)(b)
and (e) of the Information Technology Act, Section 119(b) of the Kerala
Police Act and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice Act (Care and
Protection of Children) Act.
2. The prosecution allegation is that the petitioner who is the
step father of the victim a minor child had subjected her to aggravated
sexual assault on various days from 23.4.2019 till 9.7.2020, in the
absence of her mother who was working abroad.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he
has been in custody since the date of his arrest on 1.8.2020. In fact he
is totally innocent of the allegations levelled against him.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted
that due to pandemic situation there is no possibility to take up the
matter for trial in near future and hence he is entitled to be released on
bail.
5. On the other hand the learned Public Prosecutor has submitted
that the investigation of the case is over and charge sheet has been
filed and now the case is pending as S.C.No.253 of 2021 and it is
posted for evidence. Hence, if he is released on bail that would
adversely affect the trial of the case.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well the
learned Public Prosecutor.
7. The petitioner is the stepfather of the defacto complainant.
Her mother is working abroad. She left for employment after
entrusting the minor child to her step father. Prima facie it appears that
the petitioner had exploited the situation and subjected the minor girl
to aggrevated sexual assault on various days. He has not only
committed penetrative sexual assault on the minor child but also
captured her nude photographs and with those photographs threatened
her and repeated the very same offences for more than one year.
8. Since the case is posted for evidence as submitted by the
learned Public Prosecutor no doubt it will give an opportunity to
intimidate the minor child who is presently residing with her grand
mother if he is released on bail. The chance to flee from justice also
cannot be ruled out.
9. Moreover as the allegations levelled against this petitioner are
grave, heinous and serious in nature and the victim is a minor child,
custodial trial of this case appears to be quite necessary. In view of all
these matters, I find that if he is released on bail definitely that will
adversely affect the trial of the case. Therefore, I am not inclined to
grant bail to the petitioner as requested by the learned counsel.
This petition deserves to be a dismissal and I do so.
The bail application is dismissed.
Sd/-
SHIRCY V
JUDGE
smm
