SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Suneera vs State Of Kerala on 10 April, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1941

Bail Appl..No. 2326 of 2019

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMP 409/2019 of SPECIAL COURT UNDER
POCSO ACT, MANJERI DATED 23-02-2019

CRIME NO. 38/2019 OF Thenhipalam Police Station , Malappuram

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

SUNEERA
AGED 34 YEARS
W/O SADIQUE ALI, PARACHINAKKAL HOUSE, OLAKARA P.O.,
PERUVALLUR, PARAMBILPEEDIKA, TIRURANGADI TALUK,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR

RESPONDENTS/STATE COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 031.

2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
THENHIPPALAM POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM, PIN-673 636.

OTHER PRESENT:
SMT.PRIYA SHANAVAS, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.04.2019,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl..No. 2326 of 2019

2

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
———————–
B.A. No. 2326 of 2019
———————–
Dated this the 10th day of April, 2019

O R D E R

The applicant herein, is a lady aged 34 years, who stands arrayed as

the sole accused in crime no.38/2019 of Thenhipalam police station

registered for offences punishable under Sections 377 IPC and 3(d) r/w. 4,

5 (l)(m)(n) r/w. 6 of the POCSO Act as well as Section 75 of the Juvenile

Justice Act, has approached this court seeking grant of regular bail. The

applicant has been arrested on 12.02.2019 and is in judicial custody since

then.

2. By a detailed order dated 8.3.2019, this court, in

B.A.No.1644/2019 filed by the petitioner herein, has already dismissed the

application for grant of regular bail. A copy of the said order is produced as

annexure – I along with this application.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the minor

victim and his parents have shifted their residence to a different location

(pallikkal bazar), which is about 25 kms away from the residence of the

petitioner. The learned Public Prosecutor would submit on the basis of
Bail Appl..No. 2326 of 2019

3

instruction that the minor boy and his parents have shifted the residence to

a new place, which is 10 kms away from their original residence, which was

near to the residence of the accused. Further the learned Public Prosecutor

would submit that the investigation has almost reached its fag end and the

final report is expected to be filed before the competent court concerned

without much delay. Moreover, the petitioner has already undergone

judicial custody since for the last more than 59 days pursuant to his arrest

on 12.2.2019.

4. Taking into account fact that the minor victim boy has now

shifted his residence and is not now living in the immediate proximity of

the petitioner’s residence and the fact that the investigation has almost

been completed and considering the crucial aspect that the petitioner has

already undergone judicial custody for the last more than 59 days, this

court is inclined to grant regular bail, but subject to stringent conditions.

5. In the result, it is ordered that the applicant shall be released on

bail on her executing a bond for a sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty

thousand only) and on furnishing two solvent sureties each for the like sum

to the satisfaction of the competent court below concerned.

The above order shall be subject to the following conditions:

(i). The petitioner will report before the Investigating Officer
concerned at any time between 10:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. on
Bail Appl..No. 2326 of 2019

4

every 2nd and 4th Saturdays for the first three months and
shall report before the Investigating Officer as and when
directed by him.

(ii). She shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the defacto
complainant/victim, witnesses; nor shall she tamper with the
evidence.

(iii). She shall not commit any similar offence while on bail.

(iv) The petitioner shall not go anywhere near to the residence of
the minor victim boy or his family members.

(v) The investigating officer will ensure that a police constable is
deputed to the residence of the minor victim boy at least once
in six weeks to ascertain whether the petitioner has in any
manner intimidated or influenced the minor victim boy or his
family members in connection with the above incident. If
anything adverse against the petitioner is brought to the
notice of the investigating officer, then the investigating
officer will take necessary steps for cancellation of the bail.

If there is any violation of the abovesaid conditions by the petitioner
then the jurisdictional court concerned stand hereby empowered, to
consider the plea for cancellation of bail at the appropriate time.

With these observations and directions, the above Bail Application

will stand disposed of.

Sd/-

ALEXANDER THOMAS

shg JUDGE

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation