Partly allowed

Chandran C v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC28 Jul 2016Bail Appl./5008/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allah in a pre-arrest bail application under Section 438 CrPC involving child sexual offences, declined immediate release and directed the petitioner to surrender for custodial interrogation by the Investigating Officer to clarify his alleged abetment role. Regular bail will be considered by the magistrate after interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Direction to surrender for custodial interrogation within seven days; regular bail to be considered by the Magistrate after interrogation.

Chandran C Vs 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

THURSDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JULY 2016/6TH SRAVANA, 1938

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 5008 of 2016 ()

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CRMC 533/2016 of D.C.& SESSIONS COURT,MANJERI DATED 04-05-2016 CRIME NO. 308/2015 OF MELATTUR POLICE STATION , MALAPPURAM

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:

¶8

CHANDRAN C AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.NARAYANAN, CHEERADI HOUSE, PULIKKAL, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.P.L.BABU

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN 682 031.

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. REMA R.

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28-07-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

¶15

P.UBAID, J.

¶16

- - - - B.A.No. 5008 of 2016

¶17

¶18

Dated this the 28^th day of July, 2016

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The petitioner herein seeks pre-arrest bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the apprehension of arrest in connection with Crime No. 308 of 2015 of the Melattur Police Station, registered under Sections 366(A), 342, 376 and 370 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 78 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and 23 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2007. The petitioner is the second accused in the above crime.

¶21

The petitioner is being prosecuted as an abettor. The main accused is the first accused. The first accused was arrested during investigation, and he was later released on regular bail. The victim of offence in this case is a girl aged 17 years as on the date of the alleged incident. The prosecution case is that the said girl was enticed and taken by the first accused to Wayanad with the object of sexual exploitation, and that the said act of the first accused

¶22

B.A.No. 5008 of 2016

¶23

-2-

¶24

was, in all ways possible, abetted or facilitated by the petitioner herein as a friend of his.

¶25

This application for pre-arrest bail is opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor on the ground that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is absolutely necessary as part of investigation, and that if the accused is released, he will definitely obstruct the proper and effective investigation.

¶26

In the nature of the allegations, I feel it appropriate to direct the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer for interrogation. I am not inclined to release him immediately under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.. His interrogation for the collection of some materials concerning the petitioner's exact role as abettor or otherwise, the different places where the victim was taken by the first accused, the allegation as against the second petitioner that victim's sim card, mobile phone were taken by him dishonestly, etc.; is felt necessary. Without such

¶27

B.A.No. 5008 of 2016

¶28

-3-

¶29

interrogation, investigation cannot be completed.

¶30

In the result, this application for bail is disposed of as follows:

¶31

a) The petitioner will surrender before

¶32

the Investigating Officer between 9.00 a.m. and 10.00 a.m. on any day within seven days from this date for the purpose of interrogation as part of investigation.

¶33

b) After necessary interrogation, the investigating officer will produce the petitioner before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction by 4 pm. on the date of arrest itself.

¶34

c) In case application for regular bail is

¶35

filed by the petitioner, the same shall be judiciously considered and decided by the learned Magistrate on the same day on merits.

Sd/-

P.UBAID

JUDGE

//True copy//

P.A. to Judge

Chandran C v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandran C 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

K.V. Gopinathan Vs State of Kerala

Raj Mon @ Raju Vs State of Kerala

Shahazad M. Vs State of Kerala

Murali Menon Vs State of Kerala

K.R.Ranajith Vs State of Kerala

Radhakrishnan Chalakad Vs State of Kerala