Allowed

Xxxx v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC13 Jan 2022Bail Appl./39/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two petitioners were granted anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 488/2021 alleging offences under IPC and IT Act involving sexual assault in Qatar. The court imposed strict conditions including bond, surrender, and passport deposit.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed; petitioners to execute bonds of Rs. 50,000 each, surrender with electronic devices and passports by 19.01.2022, and cooperate with investigation.

Xxxx Vs the State of Kerala — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 13^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 23RD POUSHA, 1943

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 39 OF 2022

¶6

CRIME NO.488/2021 OF THONDERNADU POLICE STATION, WAYANAD DISTRICT PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶7

XXXX

¶8

BY ADV. SHARAN SHAHIER

¶9

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶10

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

¶11

BY SMT. SEETHA S.(SR.PP)

¶12

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.01.2022, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..9431/2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

BAIL APPL. NO. 39 OF 2022 & 9431 OF 2021

¶14

¶15

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶16

PRESENT

¶17

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶18

THURSDAY, THE 13^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 23RD POUSHA, 1943

¶19

BAIL APPL. NO. 9431 OF 2021

¶20

CRIME NO.488/2021 OF THONDERNADU POLICE STATION, WAYANAD

¶21

DISTRICT

¶22

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1:

¶23

RAHAMATH @ RAHAMAN AGED 39 YEARS S/O. AMMAD, KUNIYIL HOUSE, VARIKKOLLI HOUSE, KALLACHI (VIA) KOZHIKODE DISTRICT - 673 506.

¶24

BY ADVS. BINDUMOL JOSEPH SRIVIDYA K

¶25

RESPONDENTS:

¶26

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031. 2 ADDL.R2.XXX IS IMPLEADED AS ADDL. R2 AS PER ORDER DATED 17/12/2021 IN CRL.M.A. NO. 1/2021 R1 BY SRI. M.C. ASHI (PP) R2 BY ADV K.RAKESH

¶27

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.01.2022, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..39/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶28

¶29

BAIL APPL. NO. 39 OF 2022 & 9431 OF 2021

¶30

ORDER

¶31

These are applications for anticipatory bail.

¶32

The petitioner in Bail Application No.9431 of 2021 is the 1^st accused in Crime No.488 of 2021 of Thondernadu Police Station, Wayanad District, while the petitioner in Bail Application No.39 of 2022 is the 3^rd accused in same crime. The petitioners are alleged to have committed the offences under Sections 376(1) and 109 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 66(E) and 67(A) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

¶33

The de-facto complainant is the sister-in-law of the petitioner in Bail Application No.9431 of 2021 and the wife of the petitioner in Bail Application No.39 of 2022. It is alleged that at the insistence of the petitioner in Bail Application No.39 of 2022, the defacto complainant had gone to Qatar and was staying with his brother, the petitioner in Bail Application No.9431 of 2021. It is stated that the de-facto complainant had gone to Qatar in search of an employment and while there, she was sexually abused and her nude photographs etc were taken and transmitted by accused Nos.1 and 2 with the active support and connivance of her husband,

¶34

¶35

BAIL APPL. NO. 39 OF 2022 & 9431 OF 2021

¶36

who is the 3^rd accused.

¶37

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners in these cases, the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the de-facto complainant. I have perused the First Information Statement given by the de-facto complainant and noticed that there are specific allegations, including allegations which relate to offences allegedly committed under the Information Technology Act. I note that in respect of the 2^nd accused in the case, I had granted anticipatory bail by order dated 16.12.2021 in Bail Application No.9475 of 2021 subject to certain conditions. I had noticed that in so far as the 2^nd accused is concerned, there was no specific allegation in the First Information Statement of the de-facto complainant, except an allegation that he was also involved in the sexual assault on the de-facto complainant while in Qatar.

¶38

In so far as the petitioners in theses cases are concerned, there appear to be certain specific allegations. It is also pointed out by the learned Public Prosecutor that as against the petitioner in Bail Application No.39 of 2022, the de-facto complainant had earlier filed complaints alleging commission of

¶39

¶40

BAIL APPL. NO. 39 OF 2022 & 9431 OF 2021

¶41

offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and the 1^st complaint was settled between the parties. In so far as the 2^nd complaint alleging commission of offence under Section 498A is concerned, it is submitted that following investigation, a final report has been filed and the petitioner in Bail Application No.39 of 2022 has been charge sheeted. It is submitted that a 3^rd distinct complaint has been filed alleging commission offence under Section 498A against the petitioner in Bail Application No.39 of 2022, which is under investigation by the police.

¶42

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and despite the vehement objection of the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the de-facto complainant and considering the fact that I had already granted bail to the 2^nd accused in this case though the circumstances relation to him are slightly different, I am of the view that the petitioners can be granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions.

¶43

In the result, these bail applications are allowed and it is directed that the petitioners shall be released on bail, in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.488 of 2021 of

¶44

¶45

BAIL APPL. NO. 39 OF 2022 & 9431 OF 2021

¶46

Thondernadu Police Station, Wayanad District, subject to the following conditions:

¶47

(i)Petitioners shall execute separate bonds for sums of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court;

¶48

(ii) Petitioners shall surrender before the investigating officer in Crime No.488 of 2021 of Thondernadu Police Station, Wayanad District, on or before 19.01.2022. They may be subject to such interrogation as may be necessary and thereafter, they shall appear before the investigating officer as and when called upon to do so. Considering the fact that there are allegations of commission offences under the Information Technology Act, the petitioners shall surrender any mobile phone or other electronic equipment that may be required by the police for the purpose of investigation. They shall also co-operate with the investigation in every manner possible;

¶49

(iii) Petitioners shall not attempt to interfere with the

¶50

¶51

BAIL APPL. NO. 39 OF 2022 & 9431 OF 2021

¶52

investigation or to influence or intimidate the de-facto complainant o r any witness in Crime No.488 of 2021 of Thondernadu Police Station, Wayanad District;

¶53

(iv) Petitioners shall surrender their passports before the Jurisdictional Magistrate. If they or any one among them do not have a passport an affidavit shall be executed to that effect and the same shall be filed before the said court within seven days of release on bail.

¶54

(v) Petitioners shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

¶55

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No.488 of 2021 of Thondernadu Police Station, Wayanad District may file an application before the Jurisdictional Court, for cancellation of bail.

¶56

Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE

¶57

Xxxx v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Xxxx v. the 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

Velayudhan Nair, Vs State of Kerala

Anil v @ Animaman Vs State of Kerala

Shibi Kurian Vs State of Kerala

Arshad Vs State of Kerala

Xxxxx Vs the State of Kerala

Anu @Kochumon Vs State of Kerala