Kerala High Court

Bail Appl./8739/2018 of SADHAQUE Vs STATE OF KERALA, on 28 December 2018

COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 7TH POUSHA, 1940 Bail Appl..No. 8739 of 2018 CRIME NO. 739/2018 OF Guruvayoor Police Station , Thrissur PETITIONER/S: SADHAQUE AGED 22 YEARS S/O.SULAIMAN, VALIYAKATH HOUSE,

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

FRIDAY,THE 28TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 7TH POUSHA, 1940

Bail Appl..No. 8739 of 2018

CRIME NO. 739/2018 OF Guruvayoor Police Station , Thrissur PETITIONER/S:

SADHAQUEAGED 22 YEARSS/O.SULAIMAN, VALIYAKATH HOUSE, CHOWALLOOR DESOM, KANDANASSERY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT.BY ADV. SRI.K.I.SAGEER

RESPONDENT/S:

STATE OF KERALA,REP. BY ITS PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

OTHER PRESENT:

SMT. K K SHEEBA FOR ADGP

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Page 1 of 4

O R D E R

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.739 of 2018of Guruvayoor Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 450 and 376(2)(f) I.P.C.

2. The prosecution allegation is that during April 2018, the petitioner entered into the bed-room of the de- facto complainant and committed rape on her and as aconsequence, she became pregnant and delivered a child.

3. The petitioner was arrested on 8.12.2018 and ever since he has been in custody.

4. Heard.

5. The petitioner is aged 22 years and the de-facto complainant is also aged 22 years. The de-facto complainant is a married lady, whose husband was abroad.

Page 2 of 4

She was having a child of two years old. It appears that the major part of the investigation is almost complete. Thelearned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that if at allthe petitioner had any sexual intercourse with the de-factocomplainant, the same was only with the consent of the de-facto complainant and hence, no offence under Section 376IPC is attracted in this case. I am not inclined to expressany opinion with regard to the above submission of thelearned counsel for the petitioner at this stage. Suffice it tosay that having gone through facts and circumstances of thecase, including the statement of the de-facto complainant, Iam of the view that it is only just and proper to release thepetitioner on bail. In the said circumstances, I am inclinedto allow this bail application.

In the result, this application stands allowed and the petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on condition of thepetitioner executing a bond for Rs.40,000/- (Rupees fortythousand only) with two solvent sureties, each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial court and subject to the

Page 3 of 4

following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall not contact the de- facto complainant either directly or indirectly tillthe disposal of this case.

(ii) The petitioner shall not intimidate or influence the de-facto complainant or any otherwitnesses or in any way tamper with theinvestigation.

(iii) The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer as and when required by theInvestigating Officer for interrogation.

(iv) The petitioner shall not get involved in any other offence during the pendency of this case.

Dated this the 28[th] day of December 2018.

sd

B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, JUDGE.

Dl/

// True copy // PA to Judge

Page 4 of 4

Loading citations and judicial treatment…

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead