Allowed

Akil.v.Raj v. the Station House Officer, Balaramapuram Police Station

Kerala HC15 Jul 2016Bail Appl./5106/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application for regular bail, the High Court of Kerala allowed the petition of an accused facing charges of kidnapping, rape, and intimidation. Noting that the investigation was practically complete and the victim's case seemed partially consensual and suspicious, the court granted bail subject to specific conditions including restricted movement and witness protection.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on bond with two sureties for Rs. 50,000 each, subject to conditions of movement restriction and reporting.

Akil.v.Raj Vs the Station House Officer, Balaramapuram Police… — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JULY 2016/24TH ASHADHA, 1938

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 5106 of 2016

¶6

CRIME NO. 213/2016 OF BALARAMAPURAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:

¶8

AKIL.V.RAJ @ VINOD, S/O AGED 26, VIJAYAMBARA RAJ, PADMALAYAM, MYLAMOODU, NELLIVILA, ANTHIYOOR DESOM, BALARAMPAURAM VILLAGE.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.SEBASTIAN JOSEPH (KURISUMMOOTTIL) SRI.C.MOHANAN(THIRUPURAM)

¶10

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT/STATE:

¶11

1. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, BALARAMAPURAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶12

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

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.REMA R.

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-07-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

msv/

¶16

P.UBAID, J. --------------------------------------B.A No.5106 of 2016 ---------------------------------------

¶17

Dated this the 15^th day of July, 2016

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

The petitioner herein is the sole accused in Crime No.213/2016 of the Balaramapuram Police Station, registered under Sections 366, 376, 343 and 506(1) of the Indian Penal Code. 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 learned Judicial First Class Magistrate III, Neyyattinkara on 27.6.2016. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 27.4.2016.

¶20

The victim of offence in this case is a woman aged 24 years. The prosecution case is that on 29.1.2016 the petitioner herein enticed the said girl under some false pretext, took her to his house with the object of exploiting her sexually, the lady remained at the house of the petitioner for about two weeks, and during this period she was sexually abused by him.

¶21

This application for regular bail is opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor on the ground that investigation is

¶22

¶23

B.A No.5106 of 2016

¶24

still in progress, and that if the accused is now released, he will definitely obstruct the investigation.

¶25

On a perusal of the case diary I find that the whole case projected by the victim in the complaint is suspicious. The statements given by the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C to the learned Magistrate shows that she and the petitioner herein infact left the house on 29.1.2016 with the object of getting married, and she was even married by the petitioner at a temple on the next day itself. Her statement further shows that she resided with the petitioner at his house for about two weeks, but she was not accepted by the petitioner's mother as daughter-inlaw. It appears that when the mother-in-law persisted the petitioner to abandon her, the petitioner started bad habits and even played a drama at the instance of his mother to drive her out. In such a circumstance the lady brought a complaint alleging rape against the petitioner. There is reason to believe that whatever transpired between her and the petitioner herein during the said period of two weeks was quite consensual, while they were living at the house of the petitioner as man and wife. It is not known how such acts will constitute rape as defined under the law. In the above circumstances it would be quite

¶26

B.A No.5106 of 2016 3

¶27

inappropriate and unjust to detain the petitioner further in custody. On hearing both sides, and on a perusal of the materials including the case diary and the report of the investigating officer, I find that investigation in this case is practically over, and that the petitioner can be now released on appropriate conditions. I find that the Investigating Officer has already questioned the material witnesses, and has collected the necessary materials. I do not find the necessity of continued detention of the petitioner in custody. However, some reasonable conditions for bail are felt necessary in the particular facts and circumstances.

¶28

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 Magistrate or the learned Special Judge having jurisdiction. Bail is granted on condition that;

¶29

a. The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer between 10 am and 11 am on all Thursdays for a period of two months.

¶30

b. The petitioner shall not leave the limits of

¶31

¶32

B.A No.5106 of 2016

¶33

Balaramapuram Police Station for two months.

¶34

c. The petitioner shall not in any manner influence or intimidate the witnesses, and he shall not have any contact with the material witnesses directly or over telephone or otherwise.

Sd/P.UBAID JUDGE

//True Copy//

P.A to Judge

Akil.v.Raj v. the Station House Officer, Balaramapuram Police Station

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akil.v.Raj v. the Station House Officer, Balaramapuram Police Station

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

Subair Kallekkekkal Vs the Administrator

Mohammed Hadil Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Babu M.S. Vs State of Kerala

Vincent Vs State of Kerala

Shibin Vs State of Kerala

Anil Kumar Vs Station House Officer