Allowed

Basheer v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Jun 2016Bail Appl./4235/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application for kidnapping under IPC 363/366A and POCSO, the High Court of Kerala allowed the petitioner's second bail plea. Noting substantial progress in investigation and lack of actual abuse, the court granted bail on strict conditions regarding reporting, district movement, and exclusion from the victim's village.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with two sureties of 50,000/- each conditioned to report Saturdays, remain in Palakkad district, and avoid victim's village.

Basheer Vs the State of Kerala — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/25TH JYAISHTA, 1938

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 4235 of 2016

¶6

CRIME NO. 326/2016 OF MANNARKKAD POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED :

¶8

BASHEER,

¶9

S/O. HAMZA, AGED 32 YEARS, ILLIKKAL HOUSE, THENKARA, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE & COMPLAINANT :

¶12

1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 682 031.

¶13

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANNARKKAD POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN 678 582.

¶14

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. LALIZA.T.Y

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Msd.

P.UBAID, J.

~~~~~~~~~~

B.A No.4235 of 2016

¶20

~~~~~~~~~~~

¶21

Dated this the 15^th June, 2016

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

The petitioner herein is the sole accused in Crime No.326 of 2016 of the Mannarkkad Police Station registered under Sections 363 and 366A of the Indian Penal Code, and under Section 11(6) and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. He seeks regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The application filed by him for regular bail was dismissed by the Court of Session(Special Court), Palakkad. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 16.04.2016. This is the second application made by the petitioner. His first application was dismissed by this Court on 30.5.2016.

¶24

The prosecution case is that at about 5.30 pm on 1.6.2016, the this petitioner and the co-accused kidnapped a girl aged 12 years with the object of subjecting her to sexual intercourse, but somehow the girl escaped from their custody. The incident happened on 15.4.2016. On a perusal of the Case Diary, I find materials

¶25

B.A No.4235 of 2016

¶26

¶27

substantiating the prosecution allegation. This is not merely an attempt to kidnap, as the learned counsel would submit. The girl was allegedly taken by force to a certain distance, and before the accused could take her into the autorikshaw arranged by them, she escaped from their custody.

¶28

This application for regular bail is opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor on the ground that investigation is still in progress, and that if the accused is now released, he will definitely obstruct the investigation.

¶29

On hearing both sides, and on a perusal of the materials including the case diary, I find that the Police has gone a long way with the investigation. Of course, it is true that the girl was not sexually exploited or abused by the petitioner. Before they could do anything, she escaped from their custody. The petitioner has been in custody for about two months. It is submitted that the final report is not yet ready with the police. The second accused is in custody. No previous crime is reported against the petitioner. In the circumstances where major part of investigation is over, the petitioner can be released on bail

¶30

B.A No.4235 of 2016 3

¶31

on very strict conditions.

¶32

In the result, this application for bail is allowed. The petitioner will be released on bail on his executing a bond with two solvent sureties for 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty₹ thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate having jurisdiction, or the Special Judge, as the case may be. Bail is granted on condition that;

¶33

a. The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer between 10.00 am to 11 a.m on all Saturdays for a period of three months.

¶34

b. The petitioner shall not leave the revenue district of Palakkad for three months.

¶35

c. The petitioner shall not enter the revenue village where the house of the victim of offence is situated, till trial of the case is over.

¶36

Sd/- P.UBAID JUDGE

¶37

¶38

/True copy/ P.S to Judge

Basheer v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Basheer 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

Biju S/O.Nanappan Vs State of Kerala

V.S.Chandran Vs State of Kerala

Vijesh M.P Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Sasidharan Vs Station House Officer

Eldhose K.G Vs State of Kerala

Udyan T.N Vs State of Kerala