The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.294/2014 of Kuthiyathode Police Station, Alappuzha District, for offences registered under Sections 7, 8, 9(l), (n), (p) read with Sections 10 and 11(i) read with Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. The version of the prosecution is that for the last four years, the accused, with sexual intent, had sexually assaulted the minor victim girl of aged 13 years by touching her private parts (breast and abdomen) and that the accused is relative and neighbour of the victim's family and that he had committed the sexual assault, since minor has been studying in 4th Std and she is now having school education at the level of 8th Std. The complaint regarding the same was filed before the Child Welfare Committee, Alappuzha, which was forwarded to the Kuthiyathode Police Station on 24.3.2014 and thereby, the instant crime No.294/2014 was registered by the Police and that the petitioner was arrested on 24.8.2014 and produced before the Magistrate concerned, whereby he was remanded on 25.8.2014. Sri.M.M.Nias, the learned counsel for the petitioner would urge strongly that all the allegations against the petitioner are falsely foisted and he is innocent of the allegations and that the dispute arose in connection with demarcation of the property boundary between the victim's father and the petitioner, which ended in clashes and abusive languages and when the petitioner decided to measure his property through village surveyor, the victim's father, despite request, had refused to co-operate with the measurement and that the present allegations are triggered to settle his scores arising out of the boundary/ property disputes. There are allegations that the accused had massaged the abdominal part of the victim and that he had showed the nudity of his body several times in the recent past to the victim. All these allegations are false and untenable, is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor would strongly urge that the submissions of the petitioner are made only to wriggle out of the aforementioned allegations and that the investigation has revealed commission of serious offence by the petitioner and that too, it has occurred over a period of past four years and the petitioner and the victim's family are close neighbours. He would strongly oppose the grant of bail in this case.
3. Having considered the totally of the facts and circumstances of the case and having carefully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, this Court is inclined to take the view that this is not a fit case to exercise discretion for grant of bail, going by the narration of the facts and events that have so far taken place. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed.
Sd/-
sdk+ ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.S. to Judge