RAVINDRAN K M Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Harping on the aspect that a crime was registered on an anonymous complaint and also that it was only after a complaint filed before the Chief Minister was forwarded through the Superintendent of Police that the crime has been registered and not on the basis of the complaint from the school or from the parents of the child and also pointing out that no custodial interrogation is necessary since statements of witnesses have already been taken, the petitioner who stands accused of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 9(f), 10 and 21(1) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 has approached this Court seeking pre-arrest bail.

(2.) The petitioner would point out that the allegations against him are totally false and they have been cooked up with ulterior motive. He gives reason for the same. It is also pointed out that the PTA is in fact in his favour and it has found the complaint to be frivolous and only as a precaution he had entered on leave. It is further pointed out that there were several enquiries with regard to the incident by the Child Welfare Committee and also by the Police and they found that the complaint is frivolous and thereafter crime has been registered on an anonymous complaint. The petitioner points out that he is totally innocent and has not committed any act which would constitute an offence.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor very vehemently opposed the petition. It is pointed out by him that the facts are not as stated by the petitioner and in fact the PTA passed a resolution compelling the petitioner to go on leave and in consequence of that, the petitioner has entered on leave. It is also pointed out that the materials available in the Case Diary clearly indicate that the petitioner is guilty of certain acts which would constitute offence under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. It is further pointed out that the Act has been enacted with the specific purpose and object of giving protection to the children and the matter may not be viewed lightly. It is also pointed out that anticipatory bail may not be granted to the petitioner who is accused of having committed grave offences.