The High Court of Kerala dismissed two pre-arrest bail applications filed by the accused in cases involving sexual assault on minors, finding no material change in circumstances to warrant a second application after a prior rejection.
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 P.UBAID
THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016/31ST BHADRA, 1938
Bail Appl.No. 6619 of 2016
CRIME NO. 334/2016 OF PERINTHALMANNA POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED.:
RAJEEB,
AGED 31 YEARS, S/O. HASSAN, KIZHAKKEKKARA HOUSE, KAKKOOTH, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON
SRI.S.RAJEEV
SRI.T.M.BINOY
RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT & STATE.:
1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERINTHALMANNA POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN- 679 322.
2. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI- 682 031.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AJITH MURALI
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-09-2016, ALONG WITH BA. 6625/2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
msv/
P.UBAID, J.
~~~~~~~~~~
B.A Nos.6619 & 6625 of 2016
~~~~~~~~~~~
Dated this the 22nd September, 2016
O R D E R
The petitioner is the same in these two applications. He is involved in two crimes registered at the Perinthalmanna Police Station. One is Crime No.333 of 2016, and the other is Crime No.334/2016. The victims in the two cases are direct sisters. One is aged 11 years,and the other is aged 13 years. Sexual assault and harassment is the subject matter of both the crimes. The petitioner once made application for pre-arrest bail in the two crimes. The two applications were dismissed by me by order dated 23.6.2016. He seeks pre-arrest bail again in the two crimes.
B.A Nos.6619 & 6625 of 2016
2
to be interrogated in custody by the police for the collection of the materials concerning him, the victims, and the nature of the offences. I also doubted the possibility of the petitioner committing similar offences, if he is granted prearrest bail. Such grounds and circumstances which compelled me to reject bail still exist. It is not known why the petitioner has made a second attempt for pre-arrest bail. The learned counsel submitted something about the way of investigation now being conducted by the Circle Inspector. The grievance of the accused regarding the process of investigation cannot at all be a ground to seek pre-arrest bail again. The legal aspects stand well settled on this issue. I am not inclined to entertain this second application for pre-arrest bail. Hence these two applications are dismissed.
Sd/- P.UBAID JUDGE
ma
/True copy/
P.S to Judge
B.A Nos.6619 & 6625 of 2016
3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether pre-arrest bail should be granted in a second application where the court previously rejected it without material change in circumstances.
RAJEEB
THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERINTHALMANNA POLICE STATION
STATE OF KERALA
P.UBAID
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
