Kerala High Court
Afsal Sajeev vs State Of Kerala on 3 July, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JULY 2024 / 12TH ASHADHA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 4440 OF 2024
CRIME NO.09/2024 OF PEROORKADA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN BAIL APPL. NO.2902 OF 2024 OF
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
AFSAL SAJEEV
AGED 18 YEARS
S/O. SAJEEV, VAYALIL PUTHEN VEEDU,
KOTTAKKAL, AYATHIL P.O.,
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691021
BY ADVS.
SRUTHY N. BHAT
NIKITA J. MENDEZ
P.VIJAYA BHANU (SR.)(K/421/1984)
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
BY ADVS.
SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY
BREJITHA UNNIKRISHNAN
SUDEESH K.E.
SRI.RENJIT GEORGE, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 4440 OF 2024
2
ORDER
Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2024
This is the 2nd regular bail application filed under Section
439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, by the petitioner, who
is the sole accused in crime No.9/2024 of Peroorkkada
Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the
learned counsel for the additional 2 nd respondent/victim, who
got impleaded in this matter as per order in
Crl.M.A.No.1/2024, and the learned Public Prosecutor in
detail.
3. The prosecution allegation is at about 12.30 pm on
01.01.2024, the accused, who got acquaintance with the
victim girl aged 13 years through Instagram, reached the
residence of the victim and requested her to open the door
and when she refused, he informed her that he would return
immediately after seeing her. Accordingly, the accused
entered inside the house and saw her. When she asked him
to go out, the accused caught hold her, slapped on her face,
and kicked on her abdomen. The further allegation is
BAIL APPL. NO. 4440 OF 2024
that the accused again kicked on her stomach and twisted
her right hand and thereafter, the accused taken her to the
bed room ignoring her resistance and subjected her to sexual
intercourse. The petitioner also recorded her nude
photographs in his mobile. On this premise, the prosecution
alleges commission of offences punishable under
Sections450, 376, 376(3), 354, 354(A), 354(B), 323, 506(i) of
IPC and Sections 4(2) r/w Section 3(a), Section 10 r/w
section 9(1) of the protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act, 2012 and Section 66E of the Information
Technology Act.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner, while
pressing for grant of regular bail, submitted that the petitioner
was arrested on 02.01.2024 and the investigation already
completed. According to her, since investigation was
completed and the trial could not be materialised, the
petitioner, who is aged 18 years has been in custody from
02.01.2024, would deserve bail.
BAIL APPL. NO. 4440 OF 2024
5. Opposing bail, the learned counsel for the victim
would submit that the petitioner filed bail application before the
Special Judge, and as per Annexure A1 to A2 the learned
Special Judge dismissed the same after discussing the case
at hand, holding that the petitioner could not be released on
bail. He also submitted that when the petitioner moved
B.A.No.2902/2024 before this Court, the same was withdrawn
and accordingly, the same got dismissed as withdrawn. It is
submitted by the learned counsel for the victim further that the
above bail application was withdrawn when the victim filed
application to implead in the said petition. It is submitted
further that the allegations against the petitioner are serious
and he committed rape against 13 year old victim, studying in
7th standard and further he videographed the same. It is
submitted further that he also brutally manhandled the victim
and in the event of his release, there is likelihood of further
assault against the victim. Therefore, if he would be released
on bail, the same is fatal to the very existence of the victim.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor also shared the
argument advanced by the learned counsel for the victim.
BAIL APPL. NO. 4440 OF 2024
7. Going by the prosecution allegations, the petitioner
and the victim got acquaintance through instagram and
subsequently, they became friends. While so, the petitioner
asked the victim about her residence location and when the
same was shared, at about 12.30 pm on 01.01.2024 the
accused reached her residence and knocked the door and
when the victim was not ready to open the door, he promised
to return immediately. Believing the words of the petitioner,
she opened the door. Then he assaulted the victim and taken
her to the bed room ignoring her resistance. Thereafter the
accused brutally manhandled her and she was subjected to
sexual intercourse by threatening to kill her. Thus the
apprehension expressed by the learned counsel for the victim
is having force and in such view of the matter, the accused
does not deserve bail.
Accordingly, this regular bail application stands
dismissed.
Sd/-
A. BADHARUDEEN
JUDGE
nkr
