Allowed

Fasal P.a., v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC16 Jan 2024Bail Appl./199/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Kerala allowed bail to the second accused in a POCSO case involving aggravated penetrative sexual assault. Final report filed; court granted bail on conditions similar to co-accused including cash deposit, bond, non-contact order, and surrender of passport.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with Rs.20,000 cash deposit, Rs.50,000 bond executed with two sureties, prohibition on contacting victim, surrender of passport, and restriction on leaving Kerala.

Fasal P.a., Vs State of Kerala — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 16^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 26TH POUSHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 199 OF 2024

¶5

CRIME NO.1072/2023 OF Vadanappally Police Station, Thrissur PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2:

¶6

FASAL P.A., AGED 26 YEARS S/O.ABDULSALAM, PANIKKAVEETTIL HOUSE, NADUVILKKARA, VADANAPPALLY VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680614.

¶7

BY ADV NIREESH MATHEW

¶8

RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶9

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, PIN – 682031.

¶10

2 XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX

¶11

ADV.RENJIT GEORGE - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶12

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

¶14

B.A. N.199 of 2024

¶15

P.G. AJITHKUMAR, J.

¶16

-------------------------------

¶17

B.A.No. 199 of 2024

¶18

-------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 16^th day of January, 2024

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

This is an application for regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 filed by the 2^nd accused in Crime No.1072 of 2023 of Vadanappally Police Station, Thrissur, which was registered under Sections 450, 354A(1)(i), 354B, 354D, 376(2)(n) and 376(3) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4(1) r/w 3(a), 4(2) r/w 3(a), 6(l), r/w 7, 10 r/w 9(l), 12 r/w 11(iv), (vi) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Section 77 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

¶21

The prosecution case is that the petitioner, with sexual intent, followed the victim girl, aged 17 years, and on 17.10.2023 at 2. a.m., he trespassed into her house and after intoxicating her with some drugs, subjected her to aggravated penetrative sexual assault.

¶22

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶23

¶24

B.A. N.199 of 2024

¶25

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the application for bail filed earlier by the petitioner was dismissed as per order dated 05.01.2024 for inadequate reasons. The final report has already been filed in the matter and therefore there is no justification for detaining the petitioner any further. The learned counsel would further submit that the 1^st accused in the crime was granted bail on 05.01.2024, reckoning the fact that final report against him was already filed.

¶26

The learned Public Prosecutor made available for my perusal the report of the Investigating Officer and would submitted that considering the gravity of the offence, the petitioner shall not be released on bail.

¶27

The petitioner was arrested on 22.10.2023 and has been in judicial custody ever since. Investigation in the matter is over and a final report filed on 22.11.2023. When the 1^st accused was granted bail noticing that the final report was filed, there is no reason to deny bail to the petitioner for, the allegation as against both of them is similar.

¶28

¶29

B.A. N.199 of 2024

¶30

In the result, the bail application is allowed on the following terms:

¶31

i. The petitioner shall be released on bail on cash deposit of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only), and on executing bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial court

¶32

ii. The petitioner shall not try to contact the victim girl and shall not influence or intimidate her or her family members, either directly, or indirectly;

¶33

iii. The petitioner has to surrender his passport before the trial court and if he is not having a passport, he has to file an affidavit to that effect before the trial court;

¶34

iv. The petitioner shall not leave the limits of State of Kerala without getting prior sanction from the trial court; and

¶35

v. The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail.

¶36

In case of violation of any of these conditions, the trial

¶37

court is empowered to cancel his bail, in accordance with law.

¶38

Sd/-

¶39

P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE

¶40

SMF

Fasal P.a., v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fasal P.a., 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

Rajesh Vs State of Kerala

Anil Kumar Vs Joseph

Haeir Appliances (India) Pvt. Ltd. (* Corrected as 'Haier' Per Order Dtd 26-10-23 in CRL.MA1/23) Vs State of Kerala

Subeesh, Vs State of Kerala

Renjith Raj Vs State, Represented by C.I. of Police

Anil, Vs State of Kerala

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Rajesh Vs State of Kerala

Anil Kumar Vs Joseph

*Haeir* Appliances (India) Pvt. Ltd. (* Corrected as 'Haier' Per Order Dtd 26-10-23 in CRL.MA1/23) Vs State of Kerala

Subeesh, Vs State of Kerala

Renjith Raj Vs State, Represented by C.I. of Police

Anil, Vs State of Kerala

Haeir Appliances (India) Pvt. Ltd. (* Corrected as 'Haier' Per Order Dtd 26-10-23 in CRL.MA1/23) Vs State of Kerala