Allowed

Muhammed Sahad K.v, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC16 Oct 2023Bail Appl./8128/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In bail application concerning charges of kidnapping, sexual assault, and POCSO offences, the High Court of Kerala granted regular bail to the petitioner-submitted innocent—after noting completed investigation and long detention. Bail granted on ₹1,00,000 bond with conditions against victim contact and travel without permission.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on executing bond for Rs 1,00,000 with two solvent sureties; strictly prohibited from contacting victim, tampering with evidence, or leaving India without court permission.

Muhammed Sahad K.v, Vs State of Kerala — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

¶4

MONDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 24TH ASWINA, 1945

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 8128 OF 2023

¶6

CRIME NO.283 OF 2023 OF NALLALAM POLICE STATION

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO 1:

¶8

MUHAMMED SAHAD K.V,
AGED 18 YEARS
S/O SHAMSU K.V., KAITHAVALAPPIL, CHALIYAM P.O.,
KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673301
BY ADVS.
ROY THOMAS (MUVATTUPUZHA)
K.K.SUBEESH

¶9

RESPONDENT/STATE AND COMPLAINANT:

¶10

STATE OF KERALA,
THROUGH ASST. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, FEROK REPRESENTED
BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031

¶11

OTHER PRESENT:

¶12

ADV SANAL P RAJ- PP

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

B.A No. 8128 of 2023

O R D E R

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

¶18

2 . The petitioner is the 1^st accused in Crime No.283 of 2023 of Nallalam Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioner and other accused are under Sections 363, 376(D), 376(2)(n), 354A(1)(i) of Indian Penal Code and also under Section 4(2) r/w 3(a), 6 r/w 5(l), 8 r/w 7 of POCSO Act and 3(1)(a)(wi), 3(2)(v)(va) of the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 3 . The prosecution case is that, on 28.03.2023 at about 23 hours, the petitioner, along with other accused, kidnapped a 17 years old girl who belongs to the Scheduled Caste community from the lawful guardianship without consent of her parents on a motorcycle and took her to various places on 28.03.2023, 29.03.2023 and 30.03.2023. Thereafter, the accused persons made the victim to consume alcohol and committed penetrative sexual assaults. The crime was registered in such circumstances and as part of the investigation, the petitioner was arrested on

¶19

¶20

B.A No. 8128 of 2023

¶21

06.05.2023. Since then, he has been under judicial detention. Even though the petitioner earlier approached this Court seeking regular bail, the same was dismissed as per order dated 19.06.2023. This application is submitted in such circumstances.

¶22

4 . Heard, Sri.Roy Thomas (Muvattupuzha), the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Sanal P Raj, the learned Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State.

¶23

5 . The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent of all the allegations and he was falsely implicated in the said case. The specific case of the petitioner is that, they have not committed any sexual assaults as alleged. It is also pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, the victim was in the habit of leaving the house occasionally, without the consent of her parents and used to return after several days. On that occasion also the victim left her house, in such a manner and they only provided a shelter. The learned counsel further points out that, police reports would indicate that the victim was also indulged in handling drugs. However, it is pointed out that the investigation in this case is already over and

¶24

¶25

B.A No. 8128 of 2023

¶26

the final report has been submitted. The matter is now pending as S.C No.851/2023 before the Fast Track Special Court, Kozhikode.

¶27

6 . The learned Public Prosecutor on the other hand

¶28

opposes the said application by pointing out that, there are specific allegations against the petitioner which are serious in nature.

¶29

7 . I have carefully gone through the records including the case diary. The statements of the victim as well as the mother of the victim, would fortify the contention put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioner to some extent. The mother has stated in her statement that, on several occasions the victim left the house without informing the mother. The said aspect is also evident from the statement of the victim as well. Of course it is true that, there are certain allegations against the petitioner. But

¶30

now the fact remains that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 06.05.2023. The investigation has been completed and the final report is also submitted. Therefore, taking note of the contents of the statements of the victim as well as her mother

¶31

¶32

B.A No. 8128 of 2023

¶33

and the long incarceration of the petitioner herein, I am of the view that, further custody of the petitioner may not be necessary. Even though the learned Public Prosecutor pointed out that, the petitioner was involved in another case registered for the offence punishable under Section 363 of Indian Penal Code, it is discernible from the records that, the same is also related to the matter in connection with this case. Therefore, I am of the view that, the bail can be granted to the petitioner with appropriate conditions to ensure that the petitioner is not contacting, influencing or intimidating the victim.

¶34

In such circumstances, the application is allowed on the following conditions:-

¶35

i) The petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

¶36

ii) The petitioner shall appear before the trial court as and when required.

¶37

¶38

B.A No. 8128 of 2023

¶39

iii) The petitioner shall not commit any offence of similar

¶40

nature while on bail.

¶41

iv) The petitioner shall not make any attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

¶42

v) The petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the trial Court.

¶43

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application

¶44

for cancellation of bail, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.

¶45

Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A JUDGE

¶46

rpk

Muhammed Sahad K.v, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muhammed Sahad K.v, 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

National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Marykutty

Ayissu A.K. Vs United India Insurance Co.Ltd.

Smitha Vs the United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

Ibrahim a., S/ O.Abdulla a Vs State of Kerala

New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Vs Reji Kumar S.

The National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Vishnu P.S