Mujeeb Rahman vs State Of Kerala

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J

This is an application for regular bail filed under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.253 of 2022 of Chalakkudy Police Station, Thrissur District. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 376AB and 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code,1860 apart from Section 4 r/w Section 3(a), Section 6(1) r/w Sections 4(2), 5(l), (m) and (p) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

According to the prosecution, on 02-03-2022 the petitioner committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim aged only 7 years by forcing her to perform oral sex on the terrace of the rented building of the victim and her family and a similar incident occurred earlier also and thereby the accused committed the offences alleged.

Sri.M.Revikrishnan,  the  learned  counsel  for  the  petitioner contended that the prosecution allegations are false and that the incident as alleged had not occurred. It was also submitted that petitioner was arrested on 06-03-2022, and has been in detention since then and that petitioner’s right to have a proper defense as well as the right to liberty enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India will be seriously prejudiced if the continued detention is permitted. The learned counsel also submitted that on an earlier occasion when this Court rejected the bail application, it was specifically mentioned that “petitioner cannot be released on bail at this juncture” and therefore rejection of the earlier applications shall not bar consideration of this present application.

Smt. M.K.Pushpalatha, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of bail and contended that the petitioner is alleged to have committed a heinous offence and that too on a girl of 7 years and in such circumstances, the long period of detention ought not be a factor for releasing the petitioner. It was further pointed out that, if the petitioner is released on bail, there is every chance of him threatening or influencing the witnesses.

I have considered the rival contentions.

The allegations against the petitioner are very serious He is alleged to have forced a 7 year old girl to perform oral sex on him on two occasions. However, taking note of the period of detention already gone, I am of the view that, petitioner continued detention is not essential and he can be released on bail, however, strict conditions must be imposed.

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

(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.

(b) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every fourth Saturday between 10.am and 11.am.

(c) Petitioner shall not enter into the jurisdictional limits of Thrissur District except for participating in the trial and for abiding by the condition No.(b) imposed in this order.

(d) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence or contact the victim or her family members.

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

(f) Petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the Court having jurisdiction.

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.