The petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.1485 of 2014 of Kollam East Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 354A (1) (i) (ii) & (v), 366, 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 4, 11 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 2. The gist of the allegation of the prosecution is that on 25.07.2014 at about 9 p.m., the minor victim girl aged 17 years had hired an autorickshaw driven by the petitioner from the Ernakulam North Railway Station to the KSRTC Bus stand, Ernakulam and from there she was taken to Shenoys Theatre to see a second show movie. It is alleged that while watching the movie, the petitioner had abused the victim sexually and thereafter at 2.30 a.m. she was taken to the rental house of the petitioner at Pachalam, Ernakulam with an intention to commit sexual intercourse and there also sexual abuse occurred. After these incidents, it is alleged that she was enticed to the petitioner's residence at Wayanad on 27.07.2014 with the same intention and the victim was subjected to penetrative sexual abuse. On 29.07.2014 Mananthavady Police found the victim alone wandering at Mananthavady and after interrogation, the said police authorities communicated the matter to Kollam East Police, as the girl hails from Kollam and inform them about the victim girl etc.
3. The petitioner arrested on 31.07.2014 and remanded on judicial custody on 01.08.2014. The plea for regular bail was rejected by the sessions Court and by this Court earlier, in respect of this crime.
4. Now, it is submitted that 90 days have elapsed since the arrest of the petitioner on 31.07.2014 and the consequential remand on 01.08.2014 and therefore the statutory outer time limit of 90 days envisaged in Section 167 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure has crossed, and the final report has not yet been filed. Accordingly it is urged by the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is statutorily entitled to be released on bail in view of the mandatory provisions under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C, as the above said 90 days outer time limit has expired and the investigation has not yet been completed.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor fairly submits that he is not opposing the above said prayer of the petitioner. Accordingly, it is held that the petitioner is otherwise statutorily entitled to be released on bail due to the aforementioned aspects. In view of the aforementioned aspects, this Court is inclined to order that the petitioner is to be released on bail, subject to necessary conditions.
6. Accordingly, it is ordered that the petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for ` 35,000/- (Rupees Thirtyfive Thousand only) before the Judicial Magistrate Court concerned and on furnishing two sureties each for the same amount to the satisfaction of the aforementioned court and subject to the following conditions:-
i) The petitioner shall not in any manner unlawfully prejudice the conduct of the remaining part of the investigation and he shall not enter the territorial limits of Thiruvananthapuram Revenue District until the submission of Final Report except for the purpose of complying with the other conditions in this order or for meeting the requirements of any other cases in Thiruvananthapuram district.
(ii) The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, before the aforementioned court within three days from execution of the bail bond and if he is not a holder of passport, then he shall file affidavit to that effect in the said court. If the petitioner require his passport in connection with his travel abroad, then he is free to approach the court concerned for the release of the same and for necessary permission in that regard. In case if such an application is filed, the trial court or the jurisdictional Magistrate concerned, as the case may be, is free to consider the same on merits and to pass appropriate orders thereon, taking necessary guidance from the principles laid down in the decision of this Court in the case Asok Kumar v. State of Kerala, reported in 2009 (2) KLT 712, notwithstanding the aforementioned conditions imposed by this Court.
(iii) The petitioner shall not involve in any criminal offence of similar or graver nature.
(iv) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and report before the investigating officer as and when required.
(v) The petitioner shall not influence the witnesses or shall not tamper or attempt to tamper evidence in any manner whatsoever.
If the petitioner fails to comply with any of the conditions as ordered above, the bail granted to him is liable to be cancelled.
AMV/29/10/ ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE.