Natarajan vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 5010 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                   PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
     WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF MAY 2022 / 14TH VAISAKHA, 1944
                       BAIL APPL. NO. 3225 OF 2022
CRIME NO.255/2022 OF Palakkad Town South Police Station, Palakkad
PETITIONER:

            NATARAJAN
            AGED 67 YEARS
            SON OF VELAYUDHAN, PUZHAKKAL HOUSE,
            KANNADI (P.O), KANNADI PANCHAYATH,
            KANNADI VILLAGE, PALAKKAD TALUK,
            PALAKKAD DISTRICT., PIN - 678701
            BY ADV NIREESH MATHEW
RESPONDENT:

            STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
            HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
            SMT.SREEJA V, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR


     THIS     BAIL   APPLICATION   HAVING    COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
04.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 BAIL APPL. NO. 3225 OF 2022

                                2


                   P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
                   --------------------------------
                     B.A.No.3225 of 2022
                    -------------------------------
              Dated this the 4th day of May, 2022

                              ORDER

This Bail Application is filed under Section 439 of

Criminal Procedure Code.

2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.255 of 2022 of

Town South Police Station, Palakkad. The above case is

registered alleging offences punishable under the Indian

Penal Code offences and also under Section 8 read with 7 of

the POCSO Act. Petitioner was arrested on 27.03.2022 and

he is in custody.

3. The prosecution case is that on 27.03.2022 at 4 pm

when the survivor was on her way back from school, she

went to the shop run by the accused. It is alleged that the

accused who is in his sixties subjected the survivor to

sexual assault by touching the vagina over her bottom with

sexual intend and also alleging that the accused asked the

survivor to remove her face mask and showed thumps up BAIL APPL. NO. 3225 OF 2022

sign. Hence it is alleged that the accused committed the

offence.

4. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Public

Prosecutor. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner is in custody from 27.03.2022. The counsel for

the petitioner also submitted that the petitioner has not

committed the offence. The counsel further submitted that

the investigation of the case is almost over and the

continued custody of the petitioner is not necessary. The

learned Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the bail

application. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that

the victim in this case is a minor and the petitioner sexually

abused the victim. The Public Prosecutor submitted that the

petitioner may not be released on bail at this stage. It is

true that the allegation against the petitioner is very

serious. The petitioner is aged 67 and the victim is a minor

girl. On considering the period of detention and also the

progress in the investigation, I think the continued

detention of the petitioner may not be necessary. But the BAIL APPL. NO. 3225 OF 2022

apprehension of the prosecution that the petitioner will

influence the witness is also to be considered. The same

can be redressed by directing the petitioner not to enter

the jurisdiction of Town South Police Station, Palakkad till

the investigation of the case is over. If the petitioner

violates the same, the victim or the prosecution is free to

approach the jurisdictional court to cancel the bail order.

The investigation officer will inform the victim or her

authorized person about the conditions imposed by this

Court while granting bail.

5. 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 in as much

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.

BAIL APPL. NO. 3225 OF 2022

6. 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:

1. 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.

2. 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/her from

disclosing such facts to the Court or to any

police officer.

BAIL APPL. NO. 3225 OF 2022

3. Petitioner shall not leave India

without permission of the jurisdictional

Court.

4. 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.

5. 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. The prosecution and the victim are

at liberty to approach the jurisdictional

court to cancel the bail, if there is any

violation of the above conditions.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, JUDGE

np BAIL APPL. NO. 3225 OF 2022

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 3225/2022

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES Annexure 1 TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE-I (SPECIAL JUDGE), PALAKKAD IN CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO.1004/2022 DATED 18.04.2022 RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: NIL