Raveendran vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 5057 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
   FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF MAY 2022 / 16TH VAISAKHA, 1944
                    BAIL APPL. NO. 3238 OF 2022
  CRIME NO.112/2022 OF Meppayur Police Station, Kozhikode
 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 111/2022 OF ADDITIONAL
   DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT (ATROCITIES & SEXUAL
                             VIOLENCE AG
PETITIONER/ACCUSED

         RAVEENDRAN
         AGED 53 YEARS
         S/O.KUNHICHOYI, AGED 53 YEARS,
         THAYYULLATHIL HOUSE,
         KARAYADU P.O.,
         KOZHIKODE DISTRICT
         PIN - 673524
         BY ADV K.P.SUDHEER


RESPONDENTS/STATE:

    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
          HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
    2     STATION HOUSE OFFICER
          MEPPAYUR POLICE STATION,
          MEPPAYUR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673524

         BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI. VIPIN NARAYAN


     THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.05.2022,   THE    COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 BAIL APPL. NO. 3238 OF 2022
                                2



                 P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
                  --------------------------------
                    B.A.No.3238 of 2022
                   -------------------------------
             Dated this the 6th 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.112 of

2022 of Meppayur Police Station. The above case is

registered against the petitioner alleging offence

punishable under Sections 451, 354 of IPC and Section

8 read with 7 of Protection of Children from Sexual

Offences Act.

3. The prosecution case is that on 27.02.2022 in

the night and in a day in the month of March, 2022, the

accused has criminally trespassed into the house of the

mother of the victim girl aged 16 years and attempted BAIL APPL. NO. 3238 OF 2022

to commit sexual assault. On 13.03.2022 at about

2.30 p.m., it is further alleged that he again criminally

trespassed into the aforesaid house and caught on the

breast of the victim girl over churidar top and also

kissed on the breast with sexual intent and thereby

outraged her modesty. The petitioner surrendered

before the Court on 28.03.2022 and he is in judicial

custody.

4. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Public

Prosecutor. The counsel for the petitioner submitted

that the petitioner has not committed any offence. The

counsel submitted that the petitioner and the victim are

neighbours. It is the case of the petitioner that the

victim was having a love affair and her lover used to

come to her house. The petitioner came to know about

the relationship and he informed the same to her

family. Aggrieved by the same, a false case is foisted

against the petitioner is the contention. The counsel BAIL APPL. NO. 3238 OF 2022

also submitted that eventhough there is allegation that

the petitioner outraged the modesty of the victim twice

before 13.03.2022, no complaint has been lodged in the

Police Station. The complaint was filed only on

23.03.2022. It is the case of the petitioner that there is

no explanation for the delay in lodging the complaint.

The Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the bail

application. The Public Prosecutor submitted that

serious allegations are there against the petitioner and

there is nothing to disbelieve the statement of the

victim at this stage. It is true that allegation against the

petitioner is very serious. But the petitioner is in

custody from 28.03.2022 onwards. Investigation of the

case is going on. In the circumstances, there can be a

direction to the petitioner not to enter the jurisdictional

limit of Meppayur Police Station for a period of 60 days

or till final report is filed, whichever is earlier. With the

above condition, the bail application can be allowed. BAIL APPL. NO. 3238 OF 2022

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.

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.

BAIL APPL. NO. 3238 OF 2022

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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or

to any police officer.

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. The petitioner shall not enter the

jurisdictional limit of Meppayur Police BAIL APPL. NO. 3238 OF 2022

Station for a period of 60 days or till final

report is filed by the Investigating Officer,

whichever is earlier. The petitioner shall

furnish the phone number and the details

of his place where he is going to reside

during the above period to the lower court

and to the Investigating Officer.

6. 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 hmh BAIL APPL. NO. 3238 OF 2022

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 3238/2022

PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 04.04.2022 IN CRL.M.C.NO.111/2022OF THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS FOR TRIAL OF CASES RELATING TO ATROCITIES AND SEXUAL VIOLENCE TOWARDS WOMEN AND CHILDREN, KOZHIKODE.