The Kerala High Court granted regular bail to the accused charged under IPC Sections 376(2)(n) and 323, directing his release subject to specific bond conditions including non-contact with the complainant and district restriction.
Petitioner released on bail with conditions of bond, reporting, no-contact, district restriction, and no new crimes.
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 GOPINATH P.
FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 1ST MAGHA, 1943
BAIL APPL. NO. 46 OF 2022
CRIME NO.776 OF 2021 OF GURUVAYOOR POLICE STATION, THRISSUR
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
PREGMESH. M. P AGED 36 YEARS THIRUVATHIRA URVACHAL, POST CHOUVA, KANNUR DISTRICT KANNUR, PIN – 670 006. BY ADVS. K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN S.RAJEEV V.VINAY M.S.ANEER SARATH K.P.
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 2 ADDL. R2. X X X (IS IMPLEADED AS ADDL. R2 AS PER ORDER DATED 14.01.2022 IN CRL. MA NO. 1/2022 IN BA NO. 46/2022) R2 BY ADV. SHARAN SHAHIER R1 BY SRI. NOUSHAD. K.A. (SR.PP) THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2
BAIL APPL. NO. 46 OF 2022
ORDER
This is an application for regular bail.
3
BAIL APPL. NO. 46 OF 2022
resolved their differences and they started living together. It is submitted that the petitioner had every intention of marrying the de-facto complainant and could not proceed with the proposal only on account of the fact that the petitioner and his present wife had resolved their disputes following counseling at the Family Court, Kannur. Copy of the order in O.P.No.1202 of 2019 on the file of the Family Court, Kannur is placed before me. It is submitted that any relationship between the petitioner and the de-facto complainant was purely consensual and there was no element of rape. It is also submitted that the promise to marry was not false at the the inception.
4
BAIL APPL. NO. 46 OF 2022
Family Court. It is submitted that even after the petitioner had settled all issues with his wife, he was threatening the de-facto complainant stating that he has her intimate photographs and that he would reveal the same on social media unless the defacto complainant were to agree to his demand for further sexual relationships. It is submitted that such a person is not entitled to bail.
(1) The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of
BAIL APPL. NO. 46 OF 2022
5
the Jurisdictional Court;
(2) Petitioner shall report before the investigating officer in Crime No.776 of 2021 of Guruvayoor Police Station, Thrissur District, on every Saturday at 11.00AM till the filing of the final report;
(3) The petitioner shall not contact the de-facto complainant or intimidate or influence the de-facto complainant or any witness in Crime No.776 of 2021 of Guruvayoor Police Station, Thrissur District;
(4) The petitioner shall not enter Thrissur District, except for complying with condition No.(2) above till the filing of the final report;
(5) The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.
If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No.776 of 2021 of Guruvayoor Police Station, Thrissur District or the de-facto complainant may approach this Court for cancellation of bail.
Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE
DK
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the accused in cases alleging offences under Sections 376(2)(n) and 323 IPC.
Pregmesh. M.
State of Kerala
Gopinath P.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
