Disposal of a bail application by Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. The Hon'ble Court rejected the claim of innocence, noting the victim's age and nature of allegations. This is held not to be a fit case for pre-arrest bail.
Application for pre-arrest bail dismissed and petitioner directed to surrender to Investigating Officer.
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 RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017/17TH KARTHIKA, 1939
Bail Appl..No. 3309 of 2017 ()
------------------------------CRIME NO.798/2017 OF VALIATHURA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
MUHAMMED THANZEEL T.S., S/O.TAJUDHEEN, AGED 21, PYARIJA BHAVAN, VAKKAM POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 308.
BY ADVS.SRI.S.RAJEEV SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN
SRI.V.VINAY
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE:
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAKKAVOOR POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 306.
*ADDL.R3 IMPLEADED
*ADDL.R3: STATION HOUSE OFFICER, VALIATHURA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 008 (CRIME NO.798/2017 OF VALIATHURA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT).
*ADDL.R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 08/11/2017 IN CRL.MA.NO.5697/2017.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AJITH MURALI
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-11-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, J.
B.A.No.3309 of 2017
Dated this the 8th day of November, 2017
ORDER
Criminal Procedure.
the victim was not at home, the petitioner reached the home of the victim and forcibly had sexual intercourse. Thereafter, on 13.4.2017, they had sexual intercourse yet again. According to the victim, her consent was obtained by assuring that the petitioner would marry her. During this period, the accused managed to persuade the victim to part
B.A.No.3309 of 2017 2
with her gold ornaments. Later, he went back on his promise and ditched the de facto complainant. This, in essence, is the allegation levelled against the petitioner.
4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner never had any physical or platonic relationship with the victim. The law was set in motion when the petitioner refused to accede to the request of the victim to marry her.
6.After having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and after going through the Case Diary, the claim of the petitioner that he is innocent and that he has been implicated with ulterior motives does not appear to be correct. A further probe into the matter is not warranted at this stage. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the age of the victim, the nature of allegations, the certificate of medical examination, I am of the view that this is not a fit case where this Court will be justified in granting the relief of pre-
B.A.No.3309 of 2017 3
arrest bail to the petitioner. This application is accordingly dismissed
7.If the petitioner is so advised he may surrender before the Investigating Officer who shall subject him to interrogation. He shall also be made to undergo tests, if any. Thereafter, the petitioner shall be produced before the court having jurisdiction, which shall consider the applications filed by the petitioner as well as the State and pass appropriate orders on its merits.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, JUDGE
//True Copy\
P.A to Judge
IAP
2 issues framed by the court
Whether pre-arrest bail under Section 438 CrPC can be granted to the accused accused of rape.
Whether the age of the victim and nature of allegations preclude granting bail at this stage.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Muhammed Thanzeel T.S.
State of Kerala
Raja Vijayaraghavan V
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
