Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Bail is the Rule, Jail an Exception: Kerala High Court Grants Bail After Investigation Completion in IPC and POCSO Case

01 October 2024 12:50 PM

By: sayum


Kerala High Court granted bail to Dhanesh K.V., the petitioner in Bail Appl. No. 6897 of 2024, who was charged with offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and POCSO Act for allegedly stalking and raping a woman after she attained majority. The court emphasized the principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, citing the completion of the investigation and the absence of prior criminal records as reasons for granting bail.

The petitioner, Dhanesh K.V., a neighbor of the survivor, was accused of stalking her during her minor years and subsequently raping her on June 24, 2024, after she had reached the age of majority. He was charged under Sections 354D(1), 376(2)(n), and 506 of the IPC and Section 12 read with Section 11(iv) of the POCSO Act. Dhanesh was arrested on July 16, 2024, and had been in judicial custody for 77 days at the time of the bail hearing. The investigation was completed, and the charge sheet was filed on August 20, 2024.

The key legal issue was whether Dhanesh should be granted bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) 2023, given the gravity of the allegations. The petitioner argued that since the survivor had attained majority at the time of the alleged incident, the POCSO Act would not apply. The defense also highlighted that the charges were vague and meant to harass the petitioner.

Justice C.S. Dias cited the Supreme Court’s rulings in Manish Sisodia v. Directorate of Enforcement (2024) and Prabir Purkayastha v. State (2024), which reiterated that bail should not be withheld as a form of punishment and that bail is the rule and jail is an exception. The court noted that the investigation was complete, and Dhanesh had no prior criminal history, making his further detention unnecessary.

"The petitioner’s further detention is unnecessary. Hence, I am inclined to allow the bail application but subject to stringent conditions."

The court set conditions, including regular appearances before the Investigating Officer, a ban on entering the police station limits of the survivor, and surrendering his passport.

The Kerala High Court granted bail to Dhanesh K.V., reaffirming the principle that personal liberty should not be curtailed unnecessarily. The court emphasized that bail should be granted unless there is a substantial reason to deny it, particularly when the investigation is complete and the accused has no prior criminal antecedents.

Date of Decision: September 30, 2024

Dhanesh K.V. v. State of Kerala​.

Latest Legal News