Jinshad vs State Of Kerala

This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking pre-arrest bail.

The applicant is the sole accused in Crime No.328/2026 of Pandikkad Police Station, Malappuram District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 137(1)(b), 75(1)(i) and 75(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 7 read with Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, the PoCSO Act)

The prosecution case, in short, is as follows: The applicant and the victim were in love. The victim is aged 15 years and 9 months. The applicant took her to Kozhikode Beach in the year 2023 and kissed on her cheek. Further, on 11.08.2026, the applicant took her to beach and on 13.08.2026 the victim called the applicant to her home and while he was in the company of the victim, her brother caught them and handed over to the police. Thus the applicant has committed the offences.

I have heard Sri. K.K. Dheerendrakrishnan, the learned counsel for the applicant and Smt. Aneeda Beegum, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the above crime. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicant with the alleged crime; hence, he is entitled to bail. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as part of the applicant's intentional criminal acts, and if he is released on bail at this stage, it will affect the course of the investigation.

The applicant is aged 22 years and the victim is aged 17 years. They were school mates. A reading of the FIS would show that they were in love. On so many occasions, the victim voluntarily went out along with the applicant. The FIS further reads that on 13.8.2026, the victim invited the applicant to her house at night. Initially, the applicant was reluctant to go. However, as insisted by the victim, the applicant went to the house of the victim and while they were talking in the bedroom, the brother of the victim caught them and locked the applicant in a room. Thereafter, in protest, the victim left the house. There is no allegation at all that while the applicant was in the house of the victim, he in any way sexually assaulted her or even touched her body. The only allegation in the FIS is that on a day in 2023, the victim voluntarily went along with the applicant to a beach, where, he kissed on her cheek. There is absolutely no allegation that the said act, that too in 2023, was done with any sexual intent so as to attract Section 7 of the PoCSO Act. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Considering the allegations made against the applicant, his custodial interrogation seems unnecessary. For these reasons, I find this to be an appropriate case to grant pre-arrest bail to the applicant.

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