The High Court of Kerala dismissed a bail application filed by an accused charged with rape and POCSO offences. The judge held that given the nature of the allegations involving unnatural sex and the circumstances attending the case, granting pre-arrest bail was not appropriate.
Bail application dismissed; petitioner apprehends arrest remains in force.
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 SUNIL THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH 2016/14TH PHALGUNA, 1937
Bail Appl..No. 470 of 2016 ()
CRIME NO. 1133/2015 OF AYIROOR POLICE STATION , THIRUVANANDAPURAM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
ARUN R. AGED 26 YEARS S/O.RADHAKRISHNAN, KRISHNA VILASOM, PALAYAMKUNNU MUTHANA PO VARKALA.
BY ADV. SRI.R.GOPAN
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANTS: ------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 682 031.
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE AYIROOR POLICE STATION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (RURAL) 695001
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR:SMT.R.REMA
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
SUNIL THOMAS, J.
=================
B.A.No.470 of 2016
=================
Dated this the 4th day of March, 2016
ORDER
Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.1133 of 2015 of Ayiroor Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 375(a) r/w 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(a) r/w 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
B.A.470 /16
2
the complaint was that the petitioner resiled from his agreement to marry. Learned counsel for the petitioner challenges the agreement for marriage. Without adverting to the contention on that, even the specific case of the defacto complainant is that the petitioner had made a promise to marry, had physical relationship on the basis of that promise and thereafter resiled, indicating that it was based on an absolute baseless promise. It seems to be the premise on which the case was set up by the defacto complainant.
The bail application fails and is dismissed.
Sd/-
SUNIL THOMAS Judge
Sbna/4/3/16
True Copy
P A to Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest bail in a case involving charges under Section 376 IPC and POCSO Act.
Whether the allegations amount to a fit case for granting bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
ARUN R.
STATE OF KERALA
SUNIL THOMAS
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
