Allowed

Tom Jose v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Mar 2014Bail Appl./1296/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala granted bail to Tom Jose, accused of sexually assaulting his 5-year-old daughter, pending the filing of the final police report. Bail was subject to strict conditions including execution of a bond, regular appearance at police station, surrender of passport, non-contact with the victim, and restricted movement within Kochi limits.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted subject to execution of bond, regular appearance before Investigating Officer, surrender of passport, no contact with victim, restriction within Kochi, and prior permission for leaving In

Tom Jose Vs the State of Kerala — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2014/27TH PHALGUNA, 1935

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 1296 of 2014 (B)

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRMP 184/2013 of ADDL.DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT (VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN & CHILDREN) DATED 23-01-2014 CRIME NO. 59/2014 OF PALARIVATTOM POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM

¶7

ACCUSED(S)/PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

TOM JOSE AGED 40 YEARS S/O. JOSEPH, MADATHIVALIYA VEEDU, MELUKAVU BHAGAM ERUMAPARA KARA, MANILAVU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.P.A.MUJEEB SRI.P.A.AYOOB KHAN

¶10

COMPLAINANT(S)/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶11

THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RAJESH VIJAYAN

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-03-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

JJJ

¶15

N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, J.

¶16

B.A. No. 1296 of 2014

¶17

Dated this the 18^th day of March, 2014

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.59/2014

¶20

of Palarivattom Police Station, Ernakulam District. Offences alleged against him are under section 376(i) of IPC and sections 3, 4 and 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. The petitioner has been in custody since 13.01.2014.

¶21

The victim girl, aged 5 years, is the daughter of the petitioner. It is alleged that while taking the child to Lulu Shopping Mall, the accused had inserted his fingers inside the vaginal orifice of the child and on another day while taking the child to the hospital, he had inserted a pen into the vaginal orifice. It is a heinous crime indeed, the prosecution contends.

¶22

B.A. No.1296/2014

¶23

-2-

¶24

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at least considering the period of detention, he may be granted bail. The petitioner has been in custody since 13.01.2014. It appears that there is no possibility of filing the final report within a period of 90 days from the date of remand.

¶25

Considering the period of detention already undergone by the petitioner and in view of the submission made on behalf of the petitioner that he will abide by any condition that may be imposed on him, the petitioner is granted bail subject to the following conditions:

¶26

(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge/Sessions Judge. If in case the Special Judge/Sessions Judge has any doubt about the genuineness or

¶27

B.A. No.1296/2014

¶28

-3-

¶29

correctness of the tax receipts produced by the sureties, the learned Special Judge/Sessions Judge can insist for production of the attested photo copies of the original title deeds of the sureties.

¶30

(ii) The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer and shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays between 9.30 AM to 11.30 AM until further orders.

¶31

(iii) The petitioner shall surrender his original passport before the learned Special Judge/Sessions Judge. If he is not having any valid passport, he should file an affidavit regarding the same before the Special Judge/Sessions Judge.

¶32

B.A. No.1296/2014

¶33

-4-

¶34

(iv) The petitioner will also file an affidavit that he will abide by all the conditions as mentioned above and that he will not commit any offence similar to the offence involved in this case and will not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶35

(v) The petitioner shall not leave India without the prior permission of the learned Special Judge/Sessions Judge.

¶36

(vi) The learned Special Judge/Sessions Judge will also ensure the identity of the sureties by insisting production of electoral photo identity cards/Driving licence etc.

¶37

B.A. No.1296/2014

¶38

-5-

¶39

(vii) Except for compliance of condition no. (ii), the petitioner shall not enter the limits of City Police Commissioner, Kochi.

¶40

(viii) The petitioner shall not contact the victim girl or her relatives till the disposal of the case.

¶41

The passport will be produced and/or the affidavit mentioned earlier will be filed within 10 days from the date of release from jail.

¶42

Sd/N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE

¶43

//True Copy//

¶44

P.A. to Judge

¶45

jjj

Tom Jose v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tom Jose v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suma Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Nishad @ Saiman Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Manu S/O.Joseph Vs State of Kerala, Rep.by Sub Inspector of Police, Upputhara Police Station

Kannan Vs State of Kerala

M.T.Nazar Vs State of Kerala

Ponnuswami Vs State of Kerala