Summary
The Supreme Court granted anticipatory bail to the appellant in a rape and criminal intimidation case, declining to give elaborate reasons given the sensitivity of the matter but relying on the eight-year delay in lodging the complaint, a 2018 social-media post naming about 14 persons, and the complainant's not approaching the Justice Hema Committee.
Issues
- Whether the appellant, accused of offences under Sections 376 and 506 IPC, was entitled to anticipatory bail which the High Court had refused.
Provisions considered
- Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973The High Court had rejected the appellant's application for a direction for release on bail in the event of arrest; the Supreme Court set that aside and directed release on bail on arrest, leaving the conditions to be fixed by the Trial Court. (¶¶ 2, 5)
- Sections 376 and 506, Indian Penal Code, 1860Offences of rape and criminal intimidation alleged in the FIR in respect of which anticipatory bail was sought; the Court made no finding on their merits. (¶¶ 2, 5)
Held
- Without assigning elaborate reasons because of the sensitivity of the case, the Court found anticipatory bail warranted in view of the complaint being lodged about eight years after the alleged 2016 incident, the complainant's 2018 Facebook post making allegations against about 14 persons including the appellant, and her not approaching the Justice Hema Committee constituted by the Kerala High Court. (¶ 4)
- In the event of arrest the appellant is to be released on bail on conditions to be imposed by the Trial Court, including surrender of his passport and cooperation with the Investigating Officer; breach of those conditions will entail cancellation of bail. (¶¶ 5, 6)
Result
Appeal allowed; High Court's order refusing anticipatory bail set aside; appellant to be released on bail if arrested, on conditions set by the Trial Court including deposit of passport and cooperation with the investigation.