Allowed

Nibi @ Babu v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Jul 2018Bail Appl./4668/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In NB Bail Application 4668 of 2018, the High Court at Ernakulam granted bail to the accused, Nibi @ Babu, who was in custody for offenses under POCSO and IPC. The court imposed conditions including surrendering the passport and refraining from threatening the complainant.

What did the court decide?

Granted bail on execution of a bond for Rs.60,000 with two sureties, subject to surrender of passport within 7 days and other project-specific conditions.

Nibi @ Babu 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 SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 26TH ASHADHA, 1940

¶5

Bail Appl.No. 4668 of 2018

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRL.MP 3173/2018 of SPECIAL COURT UNDER POCSO ACT,ALAPPUZHA DATED 01-06-2018

¶7

CRIME NO. 638/2018 OF MARARIKULAM POLICE STATION , ALAPPUZHA

¶8

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED

¶9

NIBI @ BABU AGED 36 YEARS, S/O NASEER, VADAKEVELI VEETTIL, NORTH ARYADU P.O., WARD NO.9, MANNANCHERRY PANCHAYATH, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.S.SANAL KUMAR

¶11

SMT.BHAVANA VELAYUDHAN SMT.T.J.SEEMA

¶12

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE & COMPLAINANT:

¶13

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

¶14

R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR T.R.RENJITH

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17-07-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

SPV

¶17

SUNIL THOMAS, J.

¶18

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

¶19

B.A. No.4668 of 2018

¶20

=========================== Dated this the 17^th day of July, 2018

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The petitioner herein stands arrayed as the sole

¶23

accused in Crime No.638/2018 of Mararikulam Police

¶24

station, Alappuzha District for offences punishable under sections 366, 376(2)(j) of I.P.C, Section 3(a) read with Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 67B of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

¶25

The allegation is that on 02.05.2018 at 10.00 a.m, accused enticed a 17 years old girl, took her to a

¶26

lodge and had physical relationship with her. There is a further allegation that he allegedly took her photograph on the mobile phone and threatened her. Pursuant to the complaint lodged, crime was registered and the

¶27

petitioner herein was arrested on 08.05.2018. He is in

¶28

B.A. No.4668 of 2018

¶29

¶30

custody since then. He seeks bail.

¶31

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶32

learned Public Prosecutor.

¶33

substantially progressed. Though the allegation against the petitioner herein is serious, Section 164 Cr.P.C statement

¶34

of victim has been recorded. The crucial witnesses have

¶35

been questioned and their statements recorded.

¶36

Having considered these facts, I do not feel

¶37

that further custody of the petitioner herein is warranted

¶38

and hence bail can be granted to him on the following conditions :-

¶39

(i) Petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of

¶40

Rs.60,000/- (Rupees Sixty thousand only) with two sureties

¶41

for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

¶42

(ii) He shall surrender his passport within 7

¶43

days from the date of execution of the bond and if not, file

¶44

an affidavit in this regard before the jurisdictional court.

¶45

B.A. No.4668 of 2018

¶46

¶47

However, further directions regarding the release of the

¶48

passport will be within the jurisdiction of the concerned jurisdictional court.

¶49

(iii) He shall appear before the investigation

¶50

officer as and when called for.

¶51

(iv) He shall not threaten, coerce or intimidate

¶52

the defacto-complainant and the witnesses nor shall he

¶53

interfere in the process of investigation.

¶54

(v) Till the final report is filed, he shall not

¶55

enter the limits of Mararikulam Police station, except for the compliance of the above conditions or for appearance in

¶56

a court of law where his appearance is essentially mandatory.

¶57

The bail application is allowed as above.

¶58

Sd/-

¶59

SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE

¶60

ACM

¶61

//TRUE COPY//

¶62

PA TO JUDGE

Nibi @ Babu v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nibi @ Babu 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

Illiyas @ Riyas Vs State of Kerala

Arundev Vs State of Kerala

Aswin Vs Si of Police, Ernakulam Town North Police Station

Maneesh Bhaskar Vs Nithya M

Jessy Shaji Vs Teena Kuncheria

Madhusoodhanan Nair Vs the State of Kerala