Kerala High Court
Radhakrishnan M.K vs State Of Kerala on 25 July, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
2025:KER:55110
BAIL APPL. NO. 8562 OF 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 3RD SRAVANA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 8562 OF 2025
CRIME NO.461/2025 OF MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION,
Thrissur
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 03.07.2025 IN Bail
Appl. NO.8114 OF 2025 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER(S)/SOLE ACCUSED:
RADHAKRISHNAN M.K
AGED 52 YEARS
S/O KUNJAN, MAMBRA HOUSE, VANDIPPARAMBU DESOM,
MULLURKKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR., PIN - 680583
BY ADVS.
SHRI.SARATH BABU KOTTAKKAL
SMT.ARCHANA VIJAYAN
SHRI.SEBASTIN
RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 XXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
SRI. NOUSHAD K. A. (PP)
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:55110
BAIL APPL. NO. 8562 OF 2025
2
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
......................................................
B.A. No.8562 of 2025
...................................................
Dated this the 25th day of July, 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.461 of
2025 of Medical College Police Station, Thrissur, registered
for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(N),
354A(1)(i), 354D & 506 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023.
3. According to the prosecution, during the
period from 2023 to 08.06.2025, the accused, who was
employed as an attender at a hospital, sexually exploited
and raped the defacto complainant, who was his colleague,
by taking her to various locations including theIR workplace
2025:KER:55110
BAIL APPL. NO. 8562 OF 2025
(a hospital), PWD guest houses, and other places and
thereby committed the offences alleged. Petitioner was
arrested on 09.06.2025 and has been in custody since then.
4. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner
as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner
contended that the prosecution allegations are false and that
petitioner has been in custody since 09.06.2025 and he
ought to be released on bail.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the
bail application and submitted that petitioner ought not to
be released on bail.
7. On a perusal of the statement of the victim,
it is noticed that the defacto complainant, a married lady,
apparently entered into a relationship with the accused while
they were both working in the Medical College Hospital.
Subsequently, on his compulsion, the defacto complainant
went with him on his scooter to guest house at
2025:KER:55110
BAIL APPL. NO. 8562 OF 2025
Kunnamkulam and Thrissur where they engaged in a
physical relationship. Due to fear that he may divulge it to
her husband, the defacto complainant continued to indulge
in physical relationship with the petitioner at various places.
Finally fearing the threats of the accused, the defacto
complainant attempted to commit suicide and when the
police came to investigate the matter, due to
embarrassment, she failed to divulge the rape committed by
the accused. The aforesaid statement of the victim indicates
that she is a married lady and have been maintaining a
relationship with the petitioner for some time. In fact, in the
order of the Sessions Court, it is noticed that the defacto
complainant had entered appearance and even submitted
through her counsel that she has no complaint against the
accused.
8. The above circumstances, prima facie
indicate that a consensual relationship is being attempted to
be converted into a case of rape. In a recent decision
2025:KER:55110
BAIL APPL. NO. 8562 OF 2025
Prashant v. State of NCT Delhi [AIR 2025 SC 33],the
Supreme Court had observed that even though complainant
therein alleged forceful sexual relationship with her, neither
did she stop meeting the accused nor did she file a
complaint during the said period.Further, in the decision in
Sameer Ibrahim v. State of Kerala and another [2025
(4) KHC 485], it was observed that merely because a
consensual relationship turned sour at a later point of time it
cannot be a reason to allege rape.
8. In the above perspective, the circumstances
prima facie indicate that the petitioner was maintaining a
consensual relationship with the defacto complainant.
However, it is a matter for the Investigating Officer to
conclude. Bearing in mind the above circumstances and also
the period of custody already undergone by the petitioner, I
am of the view that further custody is not necessary.
Therefore, petitioner ought to be released on bail. The
observations made in this order is only for the purpose of
2025:KER:55110
BAIL APPL. NO. 8562 OF 2025
disposing the bail application and these shall have no
bearing during any other stage.
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 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,
2025:KER:55110
BAIL APPL. NO. 8562 OF 2025
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
nak
2025:KER:55110
BAIL APPL. NO. 8562 OF 2025
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 8562/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED
12.06.2025 IN C.M.P 1892/2025 OF THE
JUDICIAL FIRST-CLASS MAGISTRATE'S
COURT, WADAKKANCHERY
Annexure A2 TRUE COPY ORDER DATED 03-07-2025 IN
BAIL APPL.8114/2025 ON HIGH COURT
