Kerala High Court
Mohammed Asif vs State Of Kerala on 2 June, 2025
2025:KER:38362
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
MONDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 12TH JYAISHTA, 1947
CRL.A NO. 724 OF 2025
CRIME NO.138/2025 OF KADAKKAVOOR POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
IN CRMP NO.852 OF 2025 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT &
SESSIONS COURT (ATROCITIES & SEXUAL VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
& CHILDREN), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
APPELLANT/PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
MOHAMMED ASIF
AGED 21 YEARS
S/O. NIJAM, 14/265, ELAPPURAM, KEEZHATTINGAL,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM FROM NISHA MANZIL,
ADAYAMON, KILIMANOOR VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 695 306.
BY ADV SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
PIN - 682 031.
2 DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 695 141.
3 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
KADAKKAVOOR POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 695 306.
2025:KER:38362
CRL.A NO.724 OF 2025
2
4 XXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX
SRI. VIPIN NARAYAN - SR. PP
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
02.06.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:38362
CRL.A NO.724 OF 2025
3
JUDGMENT
The appellant has filed this appeal under Section
14A of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'the Act'),
challenging the order dated 04.04.2025 in Crl. M.P No.852
of 2025 on the file of the court of the Additional Sessions
Judge for the Trial of cases relating to Atrocities and
Sexual Violence Against Women and Children,
Thiruvananthapuram, by which the application filed by
the appellant for Regular Bail was dismissed by that
court.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant
would submit that the admitted case of the alleged victim
is that the appellant and the victim were in a romantic
relationship. It is submitted that the appellant was aged
21 and the victim was aged 18 at the time of filing the
complaint. It is submitted that the complaint was filed
2025:KER:38362
CRL.A NO.724 OF 2025
almost one year after the date of the last incident spoken
of by the victim. It is submitted that the investigation has
been completed and final report has already been filed in
the matter. It is submitted that the appellant has been in
custody from 30.01.2025 and further detention of the
appellant is not necessary in the facts and circumstances
of this case. It is submitted that the relationship was a
consensual sexual relationship between the appellant and
the victim and none of the offences alleged against the
appellant can be sustained in law.
3. The learned Public Prosecutor vehemently
opposes the grant of bail. It is submitted that there are
very serious allegations against the appellant. It is
submitted that the appellant had obtained videos and
photographs of the victim and had circulated the same to
his friends including to one Krishnakumar who had
informed the victim that her photos and videos had been
circulated by the appellant. It is submitted that the
conduct of the appellant does not gel with the statement
2025:KER:38362
CRL.A NO.724 OF 2025
that he was in a romantic relationship with the victim. It
is confirmed that notice of the bail application has been
served on the victim as contemplated by the provisions of
the Act.
4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for
the appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor and
having regard to the facts and circumstances noticed
above, I am of the view that the appellant can be granted
bail subject to conditions. While the learned Public
Prosecutor may be right in contending that the conduct of
the appellant in circulating photos and videos of the
victim belies his contention that he was in a romantic
relationship with the victim, those allegations are yet to
be proved. The appellant is only 21 years of age and
though there are allegations by the victim which would
indicate that she was sexually abused by the appellant
even before she had turned 18, the fact remains that the
allegations spread over a period of time which includes
the period after the victim had attained the age of
2025:KER:38362
CRL.A NO.724 OF 2025
majority. The appellant has been in custody from
30.01.2025. No criminal antecedents are reported
against him. Investigation has been completed and final
report has been filed. Therefore, further detention of the
appellant pending trial does not seem necessary.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The impugned
order in Crl.M.P No.852 of 2025 on the file of the
Additional Sessions Judge for the Trial of cases relating to
Atrocities and Sexual Violence Against Women and
Children, Thiruvananthapuram, is set aside. It is directed
that the appellant shall be released on bail subject to the
following conditions:-
(1) The appellant shall execute bond for a sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two
solvent sureties each for the like sum to the
satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court;
(2) The appellant shall not contact the victim or
intimidate the victim or any family member of the
victim.
2025:KER:38362
CRL.A NO.724 OF 2025
(3) The appellant shall not involve in any other crime
while on bail.
(4) The appellant shall not attempt to influence or
intimidate any witness in this case.
If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated,
the Station House Officer in Crime No.138 of 2025 of
Kadakkavoor Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram,
may file an application before the Jurisdictional Court
for cancellation of bail.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
SPR
