Allowed

Rakesh v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC30 Sept 2016Bail Appl./6997/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail to the sole accused in a case involving kidnapping and rape charges under the Indian Penal Code and POCSO Act. The court noted the investigation was complete and found evidence of inconsistency in the victim's statements, suggesting the case resembled elopement rather than abduction, though the statutory charges stand.

What did the court decide?

Release of petitioner on bail on executing bond with two solvent sureties of 50,000/- each subject to conditions of reporting and distance restrictions.

Rakesh 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

FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016/8TH ASWINA, 1938H

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 6997 of 2016

¶6

CRIME NO. 560/2016 OF VECHOOCHIRA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTITTA

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

RAKESH AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.RAJAN, VALLOOR THEKKEKKARA RAHUL BHAVANAM, KOODAL MURI & VILLEGE, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.S.MUHAMMED HANEEFF

¶10

SRI.M.H.ASIF ALI

¶11

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶12

STATE OF KERALA REP. BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VECHOOCHIRA POLICE STATION, [CRIME NO.560/2016] VECHOOCHIRA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AJITH MURALI

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-09-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

¶16

P.UBAID, J.

¶17

--------------------------------------B.A No.6997 of 2016

¶18

---------------------------------------

¶19

Dated this the 30^th day of September, 2016

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

The petitioner herein is the sole accused in Crime No.560/2016 of the Vechoochira Police Station, registered under Sections 363, 366 and 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(a) r/w 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences 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 Addl. Sessions Judge, Pathanamthitta, on 19.9.2016. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 4.8.2016.

¶22

The victim of offence in this case is a girl aged 17 years. She had been in love with the petitioner herein since her school days. She went missing on 2.8.2016. The prosecution case is that the girl was enticed by the petitioner under some false pretext, taken to a house of his relative, and there she was subjected to sexual intercourse by him on a false promise that he would marry her. On a complaint made by a relative of the victim, the police registered a crime initially

¶23

¶24

B.A No.6997 of 2016

¶25

under Section 57 of the Kerala Police Act and made an enquiry. During the said enquiry the girl was taken into custody by the police and was produced before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction. Later her statement was also recorded by the police as part of investigation. She first stated that she was not in any manner sexually exploited or abused by the petitioner, and that she left the place with the object of marrying him. Later the girl gave another statement, implicating the petitioner, that she was subjected to sexual intercourse by him on a false promise that he would marry her.

¶26

On a perusal of the entire materials, I find reason to believe that this is more a case of elopement than a case of kidnapping. The first statement given by the girl shows that she in fact eloped with him, and that she was not in any manner sexually abused or exploited by the petitioner. Of course she was a minor at the time of the alleged incident. Whether she had consented or not, the petitioner will have to face the consequences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, she being a minor. I am not inclined to go into the factual aspects in detail in the above circumstances. There is nothing to show that the girl was forcefully taken away by the

¶27

B.A No.6997 of 2016 3

¶28

petitioner from the custody her parents. Though she went with him voluntarily or eloped with him, the petitioner will have to answer the charge of kidnapping, she being a minor. As regards the allegation of rape I find something suspicious in view of the different inconsistent statements given by the victim at different stages.

¶29

On a perusal of the case diary I find that investigation is practically over. The police has questioned all the materials witnesses and has collected the required materials for a prosecution. There is no question of investigation being obstructed at this stage.

¶30

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;

¶31

a. The petitioner shall report before the Circle Inspector of Police, Ranni between 10 am and 11 am on all Thursdays for a period of two months.

¶32

b. The petitioner shall not enter the limits of

¶33

B.A No.6997 of 2016 4

¶34

Vechoochira Police Station for two months.

¶35

c. The petitioner shall not in any manner

¶36

influence or intimidate the witnesses and he shall not

¶37

have any contact with the material witnesses directly or over telephone or otherwise.

¶38

d. The petitioner shall not enter the revenue village where the house of the victim is situated, till investigation process is over.

¶39

Forward a copy of this order to the Circle Inspector of Police, Ranni who will report compliance of the conditions, directly to the learned Magistrate.

Sd/P.UBAID JUDGE

//True Copy//

P.A to Judge

Rakesh v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh 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

Sibin John Vs State of Kerala

Jayakumar Vs State of Kerala

Rajesh Vs State of Kerala

Nafeesath Vs State of Kerala

Mahesh Kumar S. Vs State of Kerala

Sajeevan Vs State of Kerala