Kerala High Court
Bail Appl./8808/2017 of SASI Vs STATE OF KERALA on 29 December 2017
COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/8TH POUSHA, 1939 Bail Appl..No. 8808 of 2017 () ------------------------------- CRIME NO. 1078/2017 OF KOYILANDY POLICE STATION , KOZHIKODE DISTRICT PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI
FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/8TH POUSHA, 1939
Bail Appl..No. 8808 of 2017 ()
-------------------------------
CRIME NO. 1078/2017 OF KOYILANDY POLICE STATION , KOZHIKODE DISTRICT
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
---------------------------------
SASI, 45 YEARS, S/O.V.P.MANNAN, KOPA VAYALIL, KAPPAD, KOZHIKODE.
BY ADV. SMT.K.DEEPA (PAYYANUR)
RESPONDENT(S):
------------------------
1.
STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.
2.
THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
KOYILANDY POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE, PIN-673001.
R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. B. SREEJA
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-12-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
PBS
R.NARAYANA PISHARADI, J===================
B.A. No.8808 of 2017
=======================Dated this the 29[th] day of December, 2017
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
This is an application for anticipatory bail filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
2. The petitioner is the accused in the case registered as Crime No.1078/2017 of Koyilandy PoliceStation under Sections 11(i) and 12 of the Protection ofChildren from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The prosecutioncase is that on 06.11.2017, at about 16.15 hours, whilethe defacto complainant and his son aged 7 years enteredinto a shop for drinking juice, the petitioner, who was anemployee of that shop, made gestures to the boy with hishand and eyes with sexual intent.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner andthe learned Public Prosecutor.
4. Section 11(i) of the Protection of Children fromSexual Offences Act provides that a person is said to commit sexual harassment upon a child when such personwith sexual intent utters any word or makes any sound,or makes any gesture or exhibits any object or part of hisbody with the intention that such word or sound shall beheard, or such gesture or object or part of body shall beseen by the child. The Explanation to this Sectionprovides that any question regarding sexual intent shallbe a question of fact.
5. In the instant case, the allegation against thepetitioner is that he made gesture to the boy with hiseyes and also hands and that such gesture was made withsexual intent. It is significant that at the time of the actallegedly committed by the petitioner, the child was notalone but he was with his father. The prosecution has nocase that the petitioner has got any criminal antecedentsor that he is a person who has been accused ofcommitting similar acts on previous occasions. The firstinformation statement given to the police by the father of
3
the victim does not reveal why he felt that the gesturesmade by the petitioner were with sexual intent.In thesecircumstances, it appears very doubtful whether theoffence alleged against the petitioner would lie againsthim on the basis of the allegations contained in the firstinformation statement. At any rate, custodialinterrogation of the petitioner is not necessary to have aneffective investigation in the case. Medical examination ofthe petitioner is also not essential. Considering theseaspects, I find that the discretion of this Court can beexercised in favour of the petitioner to grant him pre-arrest bail on appropriate conditions.
6. ordered as follows:
In the result, the petition is allowed and it is
1) The petitioner shall be released on bail onexecuting a bond for `50,000/- with two suretieseach for the like amount in the event of his arrest bythe police in Crime No.1078/2017 of Koyilandy PoliceStation.
2) The petitioner shall appear before the vgd
Conclusion
investigating officer between 9 a.m and 11 a.m on allSaturdays for a period of two months from the date ofhis release on bail.
3) The petitioner shall not influence or intimidatethe prosecution witnesses. He shall not make anyattempt to tamper with the evidence in the case.
4) The petitioner shall not leave the State ofKerala without the prior permission of the Courthaving jurisdiction over the case.
5) The petitioner shall appear before theinvestigating officer as and when directed in writingto do so.
(Sd/-)
R.NARAYANA PISHARADI JUDGE
//True copy//
PA To Judge