Kerala High Court
Arun vs The State Of Kerala on 27 May, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
MONDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MAY 2024 / 6TH JYAISHTA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 3954 OF 2024
CRIME NO.309/2024 OF ARYANAD POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC NO.905 OF 2024 OF DISTRICT
COURT & SESSIONS COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
ARUN,
AGED 25 YEARS
S/O.ANILKUMAR, THADATHARIKATHU PUTHEN VEEDU,
KOKKOTTELA P.O, ARYANAD, ARYANAD VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695542
BY ADVS.
ABDUL JAWAD K.
A.GRANCY JOSE
RESPONDENT:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
ARYANAD POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695542
SRI. RENJIT GEORGE, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 3954 OF 2024
2
ORDER
Dated this the 27th day of May, 2024
This is an application for anticipatory bail filed under
Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the sole
accused in crime No.309/2024 of Aryanad Police Station,
Thiruvananthapuram, where the prosecution alleges
commission of offences punishable under Sections 450 and
376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the relevant
documents form part of the case diary.
3. In this crime, the prosecution alleges commission
of the above offences on the premise that the accused, who
made acquaintance with the defacto complainant through
Facebook, trespassed upon the house of the defacto
complainant and committed rape on her on 16.01.2024 and
for seven days in between 16.01.2024 and 15.02.2024.
BAIL APPL. NO. 3954 OF 2024
Thereafter, she became pregnant. The further allegation is
that the accused, who offered to marry the defacto
complainant, retracted from the offer of marriage after
pregnancy.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner pressed for
grant of anticipatory bail, mainly trusting on the point that if at
all there is any sexual intercourse between the parties, the
same is the outcome of consent since the defacto
complainant also admitted that they got acquaintance
through Facebook. Thus, by offering co-operation in the
matter of investigation, the learned counsel for the petitioner
pressed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the
allegations are serious and also pointed out the fact that the
defacto complainant became pregnant.
6. Going by the First Information Statement and
other materials, it is discernible that the FIR was lodged on
01.04.2024 when the defacto complainant became pregnant,
BAIL APPL. NO. 3954 OF 2024
after the alleged sexual intercourse and when the accused
neglected her thereafter. The defacto complainant is a
married lady living along with her husband. Thus, the
argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the
sexual intercourse is the outcome of consent is also a
possibility. However, the allegations would require effective
investigation.
7. Having considered the factual matrix of the case in
the above context, I am inclined to release the petitioner on
anticipatory bail, with direction to himself to surrender before
the Investigating Officer and to subject himself for
interrogation and medical potency test to aid the investigation
for two days.
In the result, this bail application stands allowed and the
petitioner is enlarged on anticipatory bail on the following
conditions:
1. The petitioner shall surrender before the
Investigating Officer within ten days from
BAIL APPL. NO. 3954 OF 2024
today and on such surrender, the
Investigating Officer can question the
petitioner for two days on 04.06.2024 and
05.06.2024 in between 10.00 am and 3.00
pm and subject himself for medical test. In the
event of his arrest, the Investigating Officer
shall produce the petitioner before the
jurisdictional court on the date of arrest itself.
2. On such production, jurisdictional court shall
release the petitioner on bail, on executing
bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand)
by himself and by two solvent sureties, each
for the like sum to the satisfaction of the
jurisdictional court.
3. The petitioner shall co-operate with
investigation and shall be made available for
interrogation and for the purpose of
investigation, as and when the Investigating
Officer directs so.
4. The petitioner shall not intimidate the
witnesses or interfere with the investigation in
any manner.
5. The petitioner shall not commit any offence
during currency of this bail and any such
BAIL APPL. NO. 3954 OF 2024
involvement is a reason to cancel the bail
hereby granted.
6. The petitioner shall not meet, disturb or to
deal with the victim or her family during the
currence of bail and any violation by itself
would warrant cancellation of the bail hereby
granted.
Sd/-
A. BADHARUDEEN
JUDGE
nkr
