Allowed

Abdul Muneer .K.K v. Station House Officer

Kerala HC31 Aug 2016Bail Appl./6270/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed the bail application of the accused in a POCSO case. Despite the grave allegations involving an 11-year-old child, the court found the investigation practically complete and granted bail on multiple strict conditions to ensure investigation proceeds and the child is protected.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on conditions: reporting twice weekly, restricting movement to jurisdiction, no contact with witnesses, not entering victim's village, and avoiding similar offences. Bond of Rs. 50,000 ea

Abdul Muneer .K.K Vs Station House Officer — 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 31ST DAY OF AUGUST 2016/9TH BHADRA, 1938

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 6270 of 2016

¶6

CRIME NO. 1107/2016 OF PANOOR POLICE STATION, KANNUR

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED :

¶8

ABDUL MUNEER K.K., AGED 36 YEARS, S/O. ABDULLA, RESIDING AT KOOLOTH KANDIYIL HOUSE, KOLAVALLUR AMSOM DESOM, P.O.THOOVAKKUNNU, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.PHIJO PRADEESH PHILIP SMT.T.S.REMYA

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PANOOR POLICE STATION, KANNUR-679 110.

¶12

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

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.REMA R.

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

msv/

¶16

P.UBAID, J.

¶17

============================

¶18

B.A.No.6270 of 2016

¶19

============================ Dated this the 31^st day of August, 2016

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The petitioner herein is the sole accused in Crime

¶22

No.1107 of 2016 of the Panoor Police Station, registered under Section 511 of 376 IPC, and Section 9(m) read with Section 10 of the POCSO 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 learned Special Judge for the Trial of Offences under POCSO Act on 16.08.2016

¶23

The victim of offence in this case is a small

¶24

girl aged 11 years. The prosecution case is that at about 6.00 a.m. on 28.07.2016, the petitioner herein assaulted the victim with sexual intent, and made an attempt to take her to a building under construction with the object of abusing her sexually, but the girl wriggled out and escaped from the

¶25

B.A.No.6270 of 2016 2

¶26

hands of the accused. On a perusal of the materials, I find nothing to constitute attempted rape, as the prosecution would alleged. What is at the most revealed is an instance of assault on the girl with some bad or sexual intent. It is not known how the prosecution alleges the offence under Section 376 IPC read with Section 511 IPC in this case.

¶27

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.

¶28

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 for a prosecution. I do not find the necessity of continued detention of the petitioner in custody. However, some reasonable conditions

¶29

B.A.No.6270 of 2016 3

¶30

for bail are felt necessary in the particular facts and circumstances.

¶31

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;

¶32

a. The petitioner shall report before the

¶33

Investigating Officer between 10.00 am and 11 a.m on all Tuesdays for a period of two months.

¶34

b. The petitioner shall not leave the

¶35

jurisdictional limits of the Panoor Police Station for two months.

¶36

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

¶37

telephone or otherwise.

¶38

d. The petitioner shall not enter the

¶39

B.A.No.6270 of 2016 4

¶40

Revenue Village where the house of the victim of offence is situated, till trial of the case is over, unless otherwise

¶41

permitted by the trial court in due course of trial for sufficient reasons.

¶42

e. The petitioner shall not involve in any

¶43

offence punishable under the Protection of Children from

¶44

Sexual Offence Act till trial of the case is over.

Sd/P.UBAID, JUDGE

rkj

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

Abdul Muneer .K.K v. Station House Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Muneer .K.K v. Station House Officer

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

Aboobakkar V.S Vs State of Kerala

Sanjith @ Sreekutan Vs State of Kerala

P.S.Unnikrishnan Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Salam Vs State of Kerala

Raveendradas Vs State of Kerala

Norbin Pinheiro Vs State of Kerala