Allowed

Rejeevan @ Kurian v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC16 Jan 2015Bail Appl./39/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. by an accused facing charges under the POCSO Act, the Kerala High Court allowed the petition. The judge found that while allegations were grave, the absence of antecedents and necessity for investigation does not justify continued detention, thus granting bail on strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on executing a `1,00,000/- bond with two sureties for like amounts and subject to six specified strict conditions.

Rejeevan @ Kurian Vs State of Kerala — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY 2015/26TH POUSHA, 1936

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 39 of 2015 ()

¶6

----------------------------CRIME NO. 567/2014 OF ULIKKAL POLICE STATION, KANNUR

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED :

¶8

---------------------------------

¶9

REJEEVAN @ KURIAN, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O PHILIPOSE, PARAPPALLY HOUSE, KOLITHATTU P.O., VAYATHUR AMSOM DESOM, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN SMT.MINI.V.A.

¶11

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT :

¶12

--------------------------------------------

¶13

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

¶14

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. LALIZA T.Y.

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-01-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

B.KEMAL PASHA, J.

¶18

B.A. No.39 OF 2015

¶19

............................................................... Dated this the 16^th day of January, 2015

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

Petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶22

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.567/2014 of

¶23

the Ulikkal Police Station, Kannur registered for the offences punishable under Section 7 read with Section 8 and Section 11(i)(vi) read with Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

¶24

The allegation against the petitioner is that he

¶25

had, on various dates, repeatedly committed sexual assault

¶26

on a fifteen year old minor girl. The petitioner has been in

¶27

custody for the period from 30.11.2014 onwards.

¶28

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the

¶29

learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the CD.

¶30

It is true that the allegations against the petitioner

¶31

B.A.No. 39 of 2015

¶32

-: 2 :-

¶33

are very grave and serious. The contents of the CD, prima facie, reveal the complicity of the petitioner. At the same time, no criminal antecedents have been reported against the petitioner. Continued detention of the petitioner in custody is not required for the continued investigation of this case. Having regard to the period undergone by the petitioner in custody, the present stage of investigation and the absence of any criminal antecedents on his part, I am of the view that the petitioner can be enlarged on bail, on strict conditions.

¶34

In the result, this Bail Application is allowed and the petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on his executing a bond for `1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the court below, and subject to the following terms and conditions:-

¶35

(i) The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer in between 9 a.m. and 11

¶36

B.A.No. 39 of 2015

¶37

-: 3 :-

¶38

a.m. on all Fridays and Tuesdays commencing from 23.01.2015 for a period of six months.

¶39

(ii) Except for observing condition No.(i) above, the petitioner shall not enter the local limits of the Kannur District for a period of six months from today.

¶40

(iii) The petitioner shall neither contact the girl or her family members nor shall make any attempt for the same, either directly or indirectly.

¶41

(iv) The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses. (v) The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation as and when required by the Investigating Officer.

¶42

(vi) The petitioner shall not involve in any offence while on bail.

¶43

It is made clear that the violation of any of the conditions stipulated above will result in the cancellation of

¶44

bail.

¶45

Sd/- B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE

ul/-

B.A.No. 39 of 2015

-: 4 :-

[True copy] P.S. to Judge

Rejeevan @ Kurian v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rejeevan @ Kurian v. 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

Baiju.P.X Vs State of Kerala

Vinod Vs State of Kerala

Firoz.M Vs State of Kerala

Kuttan Vs State of Kerala

Madhu v Vs State Ofkerala

Askarali.K Vs the State of Kerala