Allowed

Vincent Decruz v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Dec 2021Bail Appl./2088/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application allowed in rape case. Petitioner released on bail subject to strict conditions including limited custody for investigation, no movement from district except for reporting, passport surrender, and prohibition on contacting complainant or witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed and petitioner released on bail subject to conditions of limited custody for investigation, daily reporting, travel restriction, passport surrender, and prohibition of contacting t

Vincent Decruz Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 17^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 2088 OF 2021

¶6

CRIME NO.1226 OF 2020 OF PALAKKAD TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION,

¶7

PALAKKAD DISTRICT

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶9

VINCENT DECRUZ AGED 26 YEARS 'SUNUDAIL', PATHANAD, AVALUKUNNU P.O. ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN – 688 006

¶10

BY ADV C.S.MANU

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 031.

¶13

2 XXXXXXX

¶14

BY SMT. SEETHA .S. (SR.PP)

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

BAIL APPL. NO. 2088 OF 2021

¶18

ORDER

¶19

This is an application for anticipatory bail.

¶20

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1226 of 2020 of Palakkad Town South Police Station, Palakkad District, alleging commission of offence under Section 376(2 )(n) of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation against the petitioner is that on the false pretext of marriage, he subjected the de-facto complainant to repeated sexual intercourse and thereby he committed the offence alleged against him.

¶21

It is submitted that the petitioner had represented to the de-facto complainant that he was doing business in Himachal Pradesh and that he had suffered some set back there and had also taken certain amounts of money from the de-facto complaint on that pretext. It is submitted that after a while, the petitioner withdrew from the promise of marriage.

¶22

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent in the matter and that the statements in the First Information Statement would only show that the petitioner and the de-facto complainant had a consensual sexual relationship. He submitted that such a relationship between two persons, who have attained the age of majority,

¶23

¶24

BAIL APPL. NO. 2088 OF 2021

¶25

cannot in any event will be termed as rape as defined under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶26

I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor also. The learned Public Prosecutor would submit that the allegations against the petitioner are serious and the grant of anticipatory bail may affect the progress of investigation. It is submitted that since there are allegations of financial transactions between the parties, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is absolutely necessary.

¶27

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the interest of the prosecution would be served by granting limited custody of the petitioner to the prosecution for the purpose of investigation.

¶28

In the result, this bail application is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail, in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.1226 of 2020 of Palakkad Town South Police Station, Palakkad District, subject to the following conditions:

¶29

(i) Petitioner shall execute bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court;

¶30

BAIL APPL. NO. 2088 OF 2021

¶31

¶32

ii) Petitioner shall report before the investigating officer in Crime No.1226 of 2020 of Palakkad Town South Police Station, Palakkad District, every day at 09.00 AM from 22.12.2021 till 15.01.2022. The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation. The petitioner may be subjected to such procedures (such as potency test etc.) as may be necessary for the purpose of investigation and may also be subjected to interrogation during the aforesaid period and thereafter, the petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No.1226 of 2020 of Palakkad Town South Police Station, Palakkad District, whenever called upon to do so;

¶33

(iii) The petitioner shall not enter Palakkad District except for the purpose of complying with condition No.(ii) above. (iv) Petitioner shall not interfere with the investigation or attempt to contact, intimidate or influence the defacto complainant or any witness in Crime No.1226 of 2020 of Palakkad Town South Police Station, Palakkad District;

¶34

(v) Petitioner shall surrender his passport before the

¶35

BAIL APPL. NO. 2088 OF 2021

¶36

¶37

Jurisdictional Magistrate. If he does not have a passport, an affidavit shall be executed to that effect and file the same before the said court within seven days of release on bail.

¶38

(vi) Petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

¶39

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No.1226 of 2020 of Palakkad Town South Police Station, Palakkad District, may file an application before the Jurisdictional Court, for cancellation of bail.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

GOPINATH P. JUDGE

¶42

¶43

BAIL APPL. NO. 2088 OF 2021

¶44

¶45

The name of the police station mentioned in the final order dated 17.12.2021 in B.A.No.2088/2021 stands corrected as “Palakkad Town North Police Station, Palakkad District” instead of “Palakkad Town South Police Station” wherever it occurs, as per order dated 21.07.2022 in Crl.M.A.No.1/2021 in B.A.No.2088/2021.

¶46

Sd/DEPUTY REGISTRAR

Vincent Decruz v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vincent Decruz 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

X Vs State of Kerala

Sheffin T.Shajahan Vs the State of Kerala

Xxxx Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Rasheed Vs State of Kerala

Shyne Raj Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Shareefa Ullath Vs State of Kerala