High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 02 KL CK 0055

ANIL KUMAR vs STATE OF KERALA

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 1 February 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
Raja Vijayaraghavan V
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
567 of 2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

25 paragraphs · 478 words
1.

This petition is filed under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2.

The petitioner herein is the accused in Crime No.79 of 2018 of the Kallambalam Police Station registered under sections 7, 8, 9(l) read with

section 9(m) & 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (''POCSO'' for short).

3.

The aforesaid crime was registered on the basis of information furnished by one Shoba. According to her, she has a daughter aged 6 years. The

wife of the accused as well as the de facto complainant are friends. On 6.1.2018, the accused, who is a painter, came with his 5 year old son and

called the victim child, who was playing in the street. It is alleged that he sought for her assistance and when she came near, he touched her hand

and also her neck.

4.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that for trivial reasons, a Crime has been registered incorporating grave offences. The

petitioner also has a son of the same age and the only allegation is that he had touched the hands of the victim child. The ingredients of the offence

under POCSO will not be attracted is the submission. It is submitted that there are disputes between the mother of the victim and the wife of the

petitioner and the child has been utilised to frame a false case against the petitioner.

5.

The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer.

6.

I have gone through the case diary. It is doubtful whether the provisions of POCSO will be attracted in the instant case. The only allegation is

that the petitioner had touched the hands of the child. It is vaguely stated that he had touched the neck. The son of the petitioner was with him at

this point of time and the incident had allegedly happened in the middle of the street.

7.

Having regard to the nature and gravity of the allegations, the stage of investigation and attendant facts, I am inclined to grant bail to the

petitioner.

8.

In the result, this petition will stand allowed. However, it shall be subject to the following conditions:

(a) The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.20,000/-(Rupees Twenty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each

for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction.

(b) The petitioner shall continue to appear before the Investigating Officer as and when directed.

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

(d) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while he is on bail.

9.

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.