Kerala High Court
Abdul Jaleel.K @ Jaleel vs State Of Kerala on 22 December, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 1ST POUSHA, 1944
BAIL APPL. NO. 10112 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CRL.MP 3614/2022 OF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, ALATHUR
[CRIME NO.1050/2022 OF ALATHUR POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD
DISTRICT]
PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED :
ABDUL JALEEL.K @ JALEEL
AGED 38 YEARS
S/O.MUHAMMAD KUTTY, KAPPIL VEEDU,
NEDUMPARAMBU, URAKAM KEEZHUMURY.P.O,
URAKAM VILLAGE, THIRURANGADI TALUK,
MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676519
BY ADV V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL)
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT :
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031.
PP SRI.NOUSHAD K.A
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. 10112/2022
2
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
...........................................
B.A.No.10112 of 2022
.....................................
Dated this the 22 nd day of December, 2022
ORDER
This is an application for regular bail filed under Section
439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
2. Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.1050 of 2022 of
Alathur Police Station, Palakkad District, registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 354 and 506 of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860 and also under Sections 66(E),
67, and 67A of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
3. The prosecution case is that, the accused and the victim
became friends through social media, and the accused had
taken nude photographs and videos of the victim using
his mobile phone and when the defacto complainant
expressed her disinterestedness to continue the
relationship, he criminally intimidated her and published
the naked photographs and videos through the social
media and thereby committed the offences alleged.
4. Sri.V.A.Johnson Varikkappallil, the learned counsel for the
BAIL APPL. 10112/2022
petitioner, submitted that the prosecution allegations are
false and that the incident as alleged had never occurred.
It was further submitted that petitioner was arrested on
06.12.2022 and that he has been in custody since then.
5. Sri.Noushad K.A., the learned Public Prosecutor, opposed
the grant of bail and submitted that allegations are
serious requiring continued detention and that if the
petitioner is released on bail, there is every possibility of
him influencing and intimidating the witnesses.
6. I have considered the rival contentions. Even though the
allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature and
considering the period of detention and the circumstances
arising in the case, I am of the view that continued
detention of the petitioner is not essential.
7. 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.
BAIL APPL. 10112/2022
(b) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating
Officer as and when required.
(c) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to
influence the witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the
evidence or contact the victim or her family members.
(d) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences
while he is on bail.
(e) Petitioner shall not leave India without the
permission of the Court having jurisdiction.
8. In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the
jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the
application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate
orders in accordance with the law, notwithstanding the
bail having been granted by this Court.
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
AMV/22/12/2022
