The High Court at Ernakulam dismissed a regular bail application filed by the 10th accused in a criminal case involving alleged sexual assault on a minor. Upholding the severity of charges, the Court denied bail citing potential witness intimidation.
Bail application dismissed; further detention ordered.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR
FRIDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MAY 2012/28TH VAISAKHA 1934
Bail Appl..No. 2450 of 2012 ()
CBCID CRIME NO.878/CR/HHW-1/11(395/2011 OF KOLLAM WEST POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.10:
SATEESH KUMAR, S/O.VIKRAMAN NAIR, AGED 29, KOTTACKAL PUTHEN VEEDU, KADAPPARA MURI, MALAYATOOR.
BY ADV. SRI.K.R.VINOD.
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.GIKKU JACOB.
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-05-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.
B.A. No.2450 OF 2012
Dated this the 18th day of May, 2012
ORDER
This is an application for regular bail filed under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner stands indicted for offences punishable under sections 366A, 376(2)(g), 372, 373 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation against the petitioner is that he had induced the daughter of the defacto complainant to go from her house with the knowledge that she would be seduced to illicit intercourse with the accused persons. It was also alleged that she was forced to illicit intercourse with many persons. Petitioner is the 10th accused in the said crime.
B.A. No.2450/12
2
absolutely unnecessary and the petitioner is absolutely innocent of the allegations. Considering the nature and gravity of the offences alleged against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge him on bail, at this stage as the possibility of intimidating or influencing the witnesses cannot be ruled out. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.
C.T. RAVIKUMAR (Judge)
spc/
B.A. No.2450/12
3
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.
JUDGMENT
September, 2010
B.A. No.2450/12 4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner charged with offences under the IPC involving sexual assault against a minor.
Whether the likelihood of intimidating or influencing witnesses justifies denying bail in the present high-gravity offence.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SATEESH KUMAR
STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA & ANR.
C.T. RAVIKUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
