Allowed

Nithin Chacko v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Nov 2022Bail Appl./8140/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a bail application filed by an accused alleged to have committed rape and other sexual offences against a minor relative. Considering the accused's young age and filing of the final report, bail was granted with strict conditions including a bond, prohibition on contacting the victim, and restrictions on movement within the jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with a bond of Rs. 50,000 and two sureties, under strict conditions prohibiting witness interference and contact with the victim.

Nithin Chacko Vs 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 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

¶4

MONDAY, THE 21^ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 30TH KARTHIKA, 1944

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 8140 OF 2022

¶6

CRIME NO.1395 OF 2022 OF MUNDAKKAYAM POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM

¶7

PETITIONER/ ACCUSED :

¶8

XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX

¶9

BY ADVS. SIJO PATHAPARAMBIL JOSEPH D.SREENATH

¶10

RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT :

¶11

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

¶12

BY SRI.NOUSHAD K.A., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

BAIL APPL. NO. 8140 OF 2022

¶15

¶16

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

¶17

B.A. No.8140 of 2022

¶18

Dated this the 21^st day of November, 2022

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This is an application seeking regular bail filed under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

¶21

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1395 of 2022 of Mundakkayam Police Station, Kottayam, alleging offences punishable under Sections 450, 376, 376(2)(f), 376(3), 354A(1)(i), 354A(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 apart from Sections 3(a), 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

¶22

According to the prosecution, the accused had raped the victim aged 16 years, who is a close relative of the accused and thereby committed the offences alleged.

¶23

Sri.Sijo Pathaparambil Joseph, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the prosecution allegations are false and that petitioner has been falsely roped in the case. It was further submitted that since the petitioner was arrested on 20.09.2022, continued detention is not essential especially since the final report has already been filed.

¶24

Sri.Noushad K.A., the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of bail and contended that the allegations are serious and that the victim is less than 16 years old at the time of commission of the offence.

¶25

¶26

BAIL APPL. NO. 8140 OF 2022

¶27

It was further submitted that the final report was filed on 30.09.2022 and notice of this bail application was served on the victim on 23.10.2022. It was also submitted that if the petitioner is released on bail, there is every chance that he may interfere/ influence the witnesses.

¶28

I have considered the rival contentions. Petitioner is alleged to have committed a serious offence of penetrative assault on the victim, who is petitioner's first cousin. Having regard to the young age of the petitioner, who is only 21 years, I am of the view that further detention is not essential. However, strict conditions must be imposed.

¶29

In the result, this application is allowed on the following conditions:-

¶30

(a) Petitioner shall be released on bail on him executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction.

¶31

(b) Petitioner shall co-operate with the trial of the case.

¶32

(c) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he attempt to tamper with the evidence.

¶33

(d) Petitioner shall not enter into the jurisdictional limits of Mundakkayam Police Station until conclusion of the trial.

¶34

(e) Petitioner shall not contact the victm until conclusion of the trial.

¶35

BAIL APPL. NO. 8140 OF 2022

¶36

¶37

(f) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is on bail.

¶38

(g) Petitioner shall not leave the country without the permission of the jurisdictional Court.

¶39

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, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.

¶40

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE

¶41

RKM

Nithin Chacko v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nithin Chacko 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

Latha. M Vs State of Kerala

Kuriachan Chacko Vs State of Kerala

Joy John Vs State of Kerala

Roy Joseph Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Rafi Vs Balan

Mohandas Vs State of Kerala