Allowed

Ashin v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC22 Oct 2018Bail Appl./3558/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed anticipatory bail application for an accused facing POCSO and IPC charges of molestation. Court imposed strict conditions including regular appearance, non-contact with victim, and no inducement against witnesses. Custodial interrogation deemed unnecessary but subject to strict compliance.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to stringent conditions including weekly appearance, no contact with victim, and surrender of passport.

Ashin Vs State of Kerala — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

MONDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 30TH ASWINA, 1940

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 3558 of 2018

¶6

CRIME NO. 481/2018 OF KURAVILANGADU POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

ASHIN, AGED 18 YEARS, S/O. SUNNY SIMON, PARAMBANATTU MATTATHIL, VAYALA, KOTTAYAM.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.S.RAJEEV SRI.D.FEROZE SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN SRI.V.VINAY

¶10

RESPONDENTS/STATE:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031. (CRIME NO. 481/2018 OF KURAVILANGAD POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT) 2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KURUVILANGAD POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 533 (CRIME NO. 481/2018 OF KURAVILANGAD POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT)

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AJITH MURALI.

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.10.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

Bail Appl..No. 3558 of 2018

¶15

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

This application is filed under §438 of the Cr.P.C.

¶18

The applicant herein, a teenager, is arrayed as the accused in Crime No. 481 of 2018 registered at the Kuruvilangad Police Station. He faces accusation of having committed offence punishable under §§342, 354A & B r/w §34 of the Indian Penal Code and §§ 7 & 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

¶19

The victim is a minor girl and she was studying in the same school as the applicant. In her statement, which was furnished on 12.04.2018, she alleges that on 23.12.2017, the annual day celebrations were held in the school premises. She was included in a dance programme along with 13 others. Before the commencement of her programme, while she was standing near to the car park outside the auditorium, a person came from behind and wrapped a cloth around her mouth and she was pushed towards a car. She noticed a senior student sitting on the rear seat. The victim was pushed inside and the senior student went off after making an obscene comment. She then noticed that the person who had pushed her towards the car was the

¶20

Bail Appl..No. 3558 of 2018

¶21

¶22

applicant herein. She alleges that the applicant removed the cloth covering her face and then kissed on her lips. He then made an attempt to unzip her dress. At that moment, some person came near to the car and on seeing him, the applicant is alleged to have pushed her out through the right door. She later participated in the dance programme and then went with her parents to the home of a relative. They partook in a birthday party and in the wee hours of the morning, went back home. The X'mas vacation commenced on the next day. She did not disclose the incident either to her parents or to her sister. About four months thereafter, when the victim failed to secure good marks in her exams, she was teased by her family members, including her father. She then disclosed the incident, which took place during the annual day celebrations, to her sister, who in turn, alerted her parents. She further states that her parents had provided her with a mobile phone with No. '9746279765' and she used to call her friends using the said phone. The incident was reported to the Vanitha Cell at Vaikom and later, the Crime was registered.

¶23

The learned counsel appearing for the applicant

¶24

Bail Appl..No. 3558 of 2018

¶25

¶26

submitted that the applicant herein is totally innocent. According to the learned counsel, a perusal of the statement of the victim would reveal that the victim wanted some excuse for the poor marks she had obtained for the exams and the applicant herein was made a scapegoat. It is submitted by the learned counsel that according to the victim, she had only a passing acquaintance with the applicant herein. However, Annexure-A1 call data records of Mobile No. '9400153341' for the period from 1.9.2017 to 28.2.2018 of the applicant would show that there were constant interaction between the applicant, who was senior to the victim, from 1.9.2017 till 13.2.2018. Even prior to and subsequent thereto, the applicant and the victim used to talk over phone for long hours. According to the learned counsel, if the version of the victim is believed, this would not have been the response. It is further submitted that the applicant herein was a teenager and he is an academically brilliant student with high grades. In the month of April, 2018, the relationship between the victim and the applicant became strained and this has prompted the victim to level false accusations is the submission. Furthermore, it is submitted that even according to

¶27

Bail Appl..No. 3558 of 2018

¶28

¶29

the victim, the applicant had only kissed her and had not committed any aggravated sexual act.

¶30

The learned Public Prosecutor was directed to get instructions with regard to the authenticity and veracity of the contentions advanced by the applicant on the strength of Annexure-A1. On instructions, it is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the victim had no case at any point of time that she had any acquaintance with the applicant other than being a senior student of the same school. It is submitted that though there is some incongruity in the statement of the victim, the severity of the accusations will not be affected by the same.

¶31

I have considered the submissions advanced and have

¶32

gone through the case diary. The alleged incident had taken place on 23.12.2017, but the incident was disclosed to her sister in the

¶33

month of April, 2018. Though the slight delay may not be material, the fact remains that the victim as well as the applicant herein were in constant touch over phone prior to and subsequent to the incident. Even in her statement, the victim stated that she was using Mobile No. '9746279765' and Annexure-A1 would show the details of calls exchanged between

¶34

Bail Appl..No. 3558 of 2018

¶35

¶36

the parties. There are some missing links in the case and the contention of the learned counsel that the true facts have not been placed before the law enforcement authorities cannot be ignored. The contention of the learned counsel that if the applicant is arrested and detained on these allegations, it would result in travesty of justice cannot be ignored. Having considered the entire aspects, I am of the view that stringent conditions can be imposed to safeguard the interest of the prosecution and to ensure a proper investigation in the aforesaid Crime, for which the custodial interrogation of the applicant herein does not appear to be necessary.

¶37

In the result, this application will stand allowed. The applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter, if

¶38

he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum. However, the above order shall be subject to the following conditions:

¶39

(i) The applicant shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturdays between 9 A.M and 11 A.M. for a period of two months or till final report is filed whichever is earlier.

¶40

Bail Appl..No. 3558 of 2018

¶41

¶42

ii) He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer. He shall not make any attempt to contact the victim or her family members.

¶43

iii) He shall not commit any similar offence while on bail.

¶44

iv) He shall surrender his passport before the court below or if he does not have one, he shall file an affidavit to that effect within five days of his release. Application for release of the passport, if any, shall be considered by the Trial court at the appropriate stage.

¶45

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.

¶46

SD/-

¶47

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶48

JUDGE

¶49

Dxy

Ashin v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashin 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

C.P.Prakash Vs State of Kerala

C.P.Prakash Vs State of Kerala

Thomas P.J. Vs the State of Kerala

Adarsh Vs State of Kerala

Vishnu @ Kunjunni, Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Manaf Vs State of Kerala