Kerala High Court
Akhil V.A vs State Of Kerala on 23 August, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
BAIL APPL. NO. 10368 OF 2025
1
2025:KER:64285
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
SATURDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 1ST BHADRA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 10368 OF 2025
CRIME NO.205/2025 OF INFOPARK POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 02.08.2025 IN CMP NO.3334 OF
2025 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KAKKANAD
PETITIONER/ACCUSED :
AKHIL V.A., AGED 33 YEARS
S/O. ARAVINDHAKSHAN,
VELAMPARAMBIL HOUSE,
KIZHAKKAMBALAM PO,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683562
BY ADVS.
SRI.DEEPAK RAJ
SRI.K.V.SURESH KUMAR
SHRI.PRAVEEN V.P.
SRI.ANISH PAUL
SMT.ASWATHY K.S.
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT :
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 031.
SMT.SREEJA V., PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.08.2025,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 10368 OF 2025
2
2025:KER:64285
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
......................................................
B.A. No.10368 of 2025
...................................................
Dated this the 23rd day of August, 2025
ORDER
This bail application is filed under section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS').
2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.205 of 2025 of Infopark Police
Station, Ernakulam, registered for the offences punishable under Sections
64, 64(2)(m) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. The prosecution case is that, the accused who is the Managing Director
of an establishment, had promised to advance money to the defacto
complainant and thereafter took her to various places and committed
rape. Petitioner was arrested on 23.07.2025 and he has been in custody
since then.
4. Sri.Deepak Raj, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the
prosecution allegations are false and no incident as alleged had occurred.
It was also submitted that, as per Annexure-I, the defacto complainant
had issued a cheque for Rs.10,00000/- in favour of the petitioner.
Subseqently, when the said cheque was presented for encashment on
17.06.2025, it was returned dishonoured due to payment being stopped
BAIL APPL. NO. 10368 OF 2025
2025:KER:64285
by the drawer and a legal notice wa issued on 07.07.2025. Immediately
afer receipt of the said notice on 08.07.20225; the defacto complainant
proceeded to file a false complaint on 08.07.2025 itself, alleging the
commission of rape. The learned counsel submited that the entire
allegations are false and the petitioner ought to be released on bail.
5. Smt.Sreeja V., the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application
and submitted that petitioner ought not to be released on bail. It was
further submitted that the victim aged 38 years, is a divorcee, and the
allegations being serious there is every chance that the petitioner may
threaten the witnesses, if released on bail.
6. On a perusal of the annexures produced along with the bail application, it
is noticed that there is a financial dispute between the parties, and a
legal notice was issued by the petitioner on 07.07.2025, while the FIR
seems to have been filed on 08.07.2025. Considering the aforesaid
circumstances and also bearing in mind the period of detention already
undergone by the petitioner, i am of the view that further detention is
not necessary. Therefore, petitioner ought to be released on bail.
7. In the result, this bail application is allowed on the following conditions:-
(a) Petitioner shall be released on bail on him 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 court
having jurisdiction.
(b) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and
BAIL APPL. NO. 10368 OF 2025
2025:KER:64285
when required.
(c) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the
witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence.
(d) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is
on bail.
(e) Petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the
Court having jurisdiction.
In case of violation of any of the above conditions or if any modification
or deletion of the conditions are required, the jurisdictional Court shall be
empowered to consider such applications, if any, and pass appropriate
orders in accordance with law, notwithstanding the bail having been
granted by this Court.
sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
AMV/23/08/2025
