NOUSHAD S. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein is the sole accused in the instant Crime No.522/2019 of Aruvikkara Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District, which has been registered for offences punishable under Secs.376(2)(f) and (n) of the I.P.C, on the basis of the FI statement given by the lady de facto complainant on 20.6.2019 at about 11:25 p.m., in respect of the alleged incidents happened on 17.6.2019 at 3:30 p.m. in the afternoon.

(2.) The prosecution case in short is that the lady de facto complainant, aged 26 years in this case, is the daughter of the sister of the petitioner herein, aged 47 years, and that earlier when she was studying in the 10th class, which is about more than 10 years before the submission of Anx-A1 FI statement dated 20.6.2019, the petitioner used to have sexual intercourse with her. Further that on 17.6.2019 at about 3:30 p.m., at a time when she was alone he had forcible sexual intercourse with her, etc.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the abovesaid allegations in Anx-A1 Crime are absolutely false and fabricated and truth of the matter is otherwise. The petitioner's sister, who is the mother of the lady de facto complainant herein, is leading a morally loose life, which is causing public shame in that regard and the petitioner used to advise his sister to stop such immoral life and for that reason, the brother of the de facto complainant got enraged with that and assaulted the petitioner with an iron rod on 19.6.2019 at about 8:00 p.m. in the night by barging into his residence and he had attempted to commit culpable homicide and the petitioner has suffered serious injuries including fracture to the knee of the right leg and immediately thereafter he was admitted in the Medical College Hospital on 20.6.2019 and on the next day morning he had taken steps to register Anx-A2 Crime as Crime No.519/2019 of Aruvikkara Police Station, registered for offences punishable under Secs.308, 324, 326, 427, 452, 506(ii) r/w Sec.34 of the I.P.C, on the basis of the FI statement given by him on 20.6.2019 at 10:25 a.m. in respect of the alleged incidents happened on the previous day (19.6.2019). In Anx-A2 Crime, the petitioner is the de facto complainant and the brother of the lady de facto complainant in Anx-A1 Crime is the accused therein. According to the petitioner, since he had proceeded against the lady's brother and got Anx-A2 Crime registered, it is only to get over the allegations, her brother and mother have falsely made allegations which led to the registration of the instant Crime. Further it is also pointed out that one of the allegations against the petitioner is that the petitioner had consistently raped her when she was studying in 10th standard and the long and unexplained delay in lodging the crime will go to the very root of the prosecution case as it affects the very credibility and believability of the prosecution version. Further that the abovesaid allegation that the petitioner had committed rape on her on 17.6.2019 at 3:30 p.m was made by her on 20.6.2019 at about 11:20 p.m as can be seen from Anx-A1 only as a counter blast to Anx-A2 Crime registered as against the lady's brother. Accordingly, it is urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner that custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be necessary and the petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail subject to any stringent conditions.