-
by sayum
06 October 2026 2:36 PM
In a nuanced judgment delivered by Justice A. Badharudeen of the Kerala High Court, anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner, Dilshad C.H., in a case involving alleged sexual offenses against a minor. The court’s decision emphasizes the necessity of a thorough investigation to ascertain the truth behind the allegations.
Legal Point: The case hinged on an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner faced allegations under Sections 363, 370(4), 376(1) of the IPC and Section 4 in conjunction with Section 3 of the POCSO Act.
Facts and Issues: The prosecution’s claim was that the petitioner sexually assaulted a 17-year-old girl under the pretense of marriage. The petitioner, denying the allegations, argued the charge was fabricated for extortion and that he had believed the victim to be of legal age.
Assessment of Complaint’s Timing: The court examined the delay in the registration of the FIR, set against the backdrop of the petitioner’s marriage to another woman and prior complaints suggesting an anticipation of false charges.
Petitioner’s Proactive Measures: Justice Badharudeen noted the complaints lodged by the petitioner before the FIR was registered, reflecting his stance against the allegations.
Investigative Necessity: Emphasizing the seriousness of the accusations, the court underscored the importance of an in-depth investigation to uncover the factual scenario.
Bail Conditions: Granting anticipatory bail, the court imposed stringent conditions, mandating the petitioner’s cooperation with the investigation, ensuring no intimidation of witnesses, and prohibiting any contact with the victim.
Decision: The court allowed the anticipatory bail with instructions for the petitioner to comply with investigation procedures, including appearing for a medical test, while ensuring conditions to safeguard the integrity of the investigation process.
Date of Decision: April 8, 2024.
DILSHAD C.H VS STATE OF KERALA.
