Kerala High Court
V.P.Nazar @ Nachikka vs The Sub Inspector Of Police on 31 May, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
Friday, the 31st day of May 2024 / 10th Jyaishta, 1946
CRL.M.APPL.NO.2/2024 IN CRL.A NO.435 OF 2020
SC 133/2017 OF SPECIAL COURT FOR TRIAL OF OFFENCES UNDER POCSO ACT & CHILDREN'S
COURT (ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT -I), KALPETTA, WAYANAD
APPLICANT/APPELLANT:
V.P.NAZAR @ NACHIKKA, AGED 49 YEARS,
S/O.AMMED KOYA, VILANHIPPILAKKAL HOUSE,
KUTTAMANGALAM, MUTTIL SOUTH VILLAGE, WAYANAD.
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALPETTA POLICE STATION, WAYANAD 673
121.
2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, EERNAKULAM 682 031.
Application praying that in the circumstances stated therein
the High Court be pleased to revive the suspension of sentence passed
earlier and extend the same till the disposal above appeal in the interest
of justice.
This Application coming on for orders upon perusing the
application and this court's order dated 09.11.2021 in Crl.M.A.1/2021
and on 14.05.2024 and 27.05.24 in Crl.M.A.No.2/2024 therein and upon
hearing the arguments of M/S.T.G.RAJENDRAN, Advocate for the petitioner
and of the PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the respondent, the court passed the
following:
P.T.O.
P.G. AJITHKUMAR, J.
------------------------------------------------
Crl.M.A.No.2 of 2024
in
Crl.A. No.435 of 2020
---------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 31st day of May, 2024
ORDER
This is a petition filed by the appellant seeking
revival of the order of suspension of sentence and extend it
till disposal of the appeal.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned Public prosecutor.
3. Interim bail was granted to the petitioner for a
period of 6 months by this Court as per order dated
09.11.2021 in Crl.M.A.No.1 of 2021. Paragraph No.9 in that
order reads as follows:
"9. As contended by the learned counsel, the learned
Sessions Judge mainly relied upon the evidence of PW4,
who had seen the victim in the shop of the accused and
PW5 also deposed that PW4 had seen the victim in
Madeena Mess on 27.2.2017 at 4.30 p.m., The victim
informed PW5, the accused committed rape upon her
and sexually harassed her. PW9 also deposed that she
came to know about the incidents as informed by PW5
and she is in acquaintance with the victim when the
victim informed her that Nazar committed rape on her
from Madeena Mess. So according to the trial court, the
evidence of PW4, PW5 and PW9 point to the guilt of the
accused and it supports the medical evidence of PW13.
So the court below was of the view that even though the
victim turned hostile her admission before the court
about the statement given to the investigating officer
and before the magistrate unerringly points towards the
guilt of the accused. But the statement of the victim
produced from the side of the petitioner would go to
show that even though the victim admitted certain
statements, during cross examination by the prosecutor,
in the very next sentence, she added that it was so
stated as told by the people accompanied her. The
evidence of PW4 which is relied upon by the trial court
as per the judgment itself would only go to show that
she saw the victim in the shop of the accused and
evidence of PW5 is that PW4 saw the victim in 'Madeena
Mess' and the victim informed PW5 that the accused
committed rape upon her and asexually assaulted her.
So in such circumstances, taking into account the totality
of the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that the
petitioner has got an arguable case before this Court. He
has been under confinement from 24.6.2020 onwards.
Though the learned Public Prosecutor relied upon the
aforementioned decisions those are not squarely
applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case."
4. The period of interim bail has been extended from
time to time. Although the period of interim bail expired on
12.06.2023 by virtue of order dated 14.05.2024, it stands
revived and extended. Thereby the petitioner has continued
to be on bail since he was released as per order dated
09.11.2021.
5. When this Court observed that there is an
arguable case for the appellant, and granted interim bail in
the light of that observation, it is only appropriate to allow
him to continue on bail till the disposal of the appeal.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed. Execution of the
sentence is suspended till the disposal of appeal, subject to
the following conditions:
i) The bond executed by the petitioner in terms of the
order dated 09.11.2021 shall be in force during the period he
continues to be on bail as per this order.
ii) He shall deposit 50% of the fine amount in the trial
court within one month;
iii) During the bail period, he shall not get involved in
any offence; and
iv) He shall not contact or try to intimidate the victim
or witnesses examined in the case.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the
prosecution shall be at liberty to apply before this Court for
cancellation of the suspension of sentence.
Sd/-
P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE
SSK/31/05
31-05-2024 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar
