Saturday, 25 July 2020

Whether the court should release accused on anticipatory bail if she has uploaded video to teach sex education to the children in the society?

 I am of the opinion that the petitioner uses the
children for the purpose of sexual gratification
because the children are represented in the video
uploaded in an indecent and obscene manner because they
are painting on a naked body of their mother. The
Public Prosecutor made available the video to me with
the consent of the counsel for the petitioner. I
watched the video. The expression of the petitioner,
while the children are painting on her breast, is also
important. Whether that amounts to the use of the
children for the purpose of sexual gratification can be
finally decided only after a custodial interrogation of
the petitioner. The explanation to Section 13, it is
clearly stated that the expression of 'use a child'
shall include involving a child through any medium like
print, electronic, computer, or any other technology
for preparation, production, offering, transmitting,
publishing, facilitation and distribution of
pornographic material. These are the matters to be
investigated at the time of investigation. While
considering a Bail Application under Section 438 Cr.PC,

I am not in a position to say that, no offence under
Section 13, 14 and 15 of the POCSO Act is attracted in
this case.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
 MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
 24TH DAY OF JULY 2020
Bail Appl..No.3861 OF 2020

FATHIMA A.S. Vs   STATE OF KERALA



These Bail Applications filed under Section 438 of
the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C) were heard through
Video Conference.
2. The petitioner, a mother asked her two minor
children, aged 14 (boy) and 8 (girl) to paint on her
naked body above the navel. The children painted on her
naked body. The petitioner recorded it as a video.
After that, the video is uploaded in social media with
the heading "Body Art and Politics."
3. When this video was found by the Cyber dome,
Kochi City Police, they submitted a report before the
Inspector General of Police and the Commissioner of
Police, Kochi stating that this is a child pornography
related crime in social media. The Inspector General of
Police and the Commissioner of Police, Kochi City,
forwarded the report to the Station House Officer,
Ernakulam Town South Police Station for necessary
action. Based on the report, Crime No.478 of 2020 was
registered by the Ernakulam Town South Police Station
alleging offences punishable under Sections 13, 14 and

15 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences
Act,2012 ('POCSO Act') and under Section 67B(d) of the
Information Technology Act,2000 (I.T.Act). Section 75
of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Act, 2015 is also alleged against the
petitioner. Crime No.2067 of 2020 was registered at
Thiruvalla Police Station for the same set of facts
against the petitioner. Therefore, B.A. No.3861 of 2020
and B.A. No.4041 of 2020 are filed by the petitioner
under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
(Cr.PC). When these applications came up for
consideration, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted
that the Crime registered at Thiruvalla Police Station
is clubbed with Crime No.478/2000 of the Ernakulam Town
South Police Station. Therefore, B.A. No.4041 of 2020
is infructuous.
4. What now remains is Crime No.478 of 2000 of
Ernakulam Town South Police Station. The learned
counsel for the petitioner submitted that, even if the
entire allegations in the F.I.R. are accepted in toto,
no offence under Sections 13, 14, and 15 of the POSCO
Act is made out. The learned counsel also submitted

that, the offence under Section 67B (d) of the I.T. Act
and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children)Act, 2015 is also not made out.
5. The petitioner's submission is that she is an
Activist and has been fighting her battle against body
discrimination. The petitioner submitted that, it is
her firm belief that, there needs to be openness so far
as the discussion on body and body parts is concerned,
and there is nothing to be hidden within and outside
the family about the same. According to the petitioner,
the children should be given sex education, and they
also need to be made aware of the body and body parts
as well. In which event, they would mature themselves
to view the body and body parts as a different medium
altogether rather than seen it as a sexual tool alone.
According to her, she uploaded the above video with
such an intention. The petitioner contends that,
morality of the society and public outcry cannot be a
reason and logic for instituting a crime and
prosecuting a person. Hence, the petitioner filed this
Bail Application under Section 438 Cr.P.C apprehending
arrest in the above case.

6. This court issued notice to the Public
Prosecutor. The de facto complainant in Thiruvalla
Crime filed a petition for impleading him in the case
and the same was allowed.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner
Advocate Renjith B. Marar, the learned counsel for the
2nd respondent Advocate Sasith Panicker and the learned
Public Prosecutor Suman Chakravarthy.
8. The learned counsel for the petitioner, the
learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for
the de facto complainant filed separate argument notes
before this court.
9. The counsel of the petitioner submitted that,
the petitioner uploaded the video with a write up. The
petitioner extracted the English translation of the
same in his argument note which is extracted hereunder:
“In a moral fascist society that look towards the
female body as mere illusions. Exposing the views
which the society seek to conceal is also a
political Act. In today’s society where a female is
restricted or Censored from opening her mouth or
utter a word with regards to Nudity or Sexuality,
brave political act against it is what time demands.
When Compare to Male body, Feminine body and her
Nakedness has been considered as a mere 55kg of Flesh

is just because of the wrong Sexual Education put
forward by our society. Society has Customized the
Mindset of people in such a way that while looking at
a woman who wear a legging make you Sexual arousal
whereas the man Stands Macho with his Chest-Hair
Exposed as well as showing naked legs by folding the
dhoti he wears as a statuesque, doesn’t Connect to
Sexual Arousal is just because of the wrong sexual
consciousness that is currently being injected by the
society. Just as beauty is in the eye of the
beholder, so is obscenity in the eyes of the
beholder.
Currently, the situation demands people to learn
nudity, sex or even kissing from Porn Site. In the
modern era, digital female nudity are just eruptions
of over-expectation. When porn magazines and related
sites exagerate and amplify about the female body and
the sexuality of the woman. It’s the same what our
children are forced to learn from such kind of nudity
as well as sexuality. In there minds and hopes female
body has been potraited as marble stones which has
been carved into perfection, which is actually
against the reality. Hanging breasts, landing belly
and bigger things may not satisfy their expectations
for the future.
To what extent can a woman satisfy a man who
approaches her with all these high expectations?
Tomorrow, when their partners are worried about their
bodies becoming too sturdy and sexy, if they need to
confidently tell that this naturality is your real
beauty. They have to grow up seeing the natural women
bodies. These seeds need to be sown when they are
young with proper sex education as well as Sexual
Consciousness. No child who has grown up seeing his

mother’s nakedness and body can abuse another female
body. Therefore, vaccines against these false
preceptions and expectation about women’s body and
sexuality should be initiated from home itself.
Within the current family situation of our society,
there is only little room for openness associated
with sexuality or nudity. While in school, the
feminism of untouchability divides people into girls
and boys. That is where the fear of the female body
begins for girls. As well as curiosity of the female
body begins for boys.
When the right path to love and sexuality is
eliminated, it becomes a criminal and social
disaster. The answer to the question of why nudity
should be exposed? is the question of why a woman
should be naked? Despite being covered up, women’s
bodies are being attacked every minute.
From infants to elderly person to animals, when they
are subjected to such violence, the reality is that,
female body is the best weapon to defend such acts.
In a sexually Frustrated society, women simply do not
feel safe in clothes. Its high time that you need to
be open-up and open-about what the female body is all
about and what Sex & Sexuality really means. The
women have to start sharpen her weapons to sew the
Cloth for nakedness.”
According to the counsel, in the light of the write up
uploaded along with the video, the intention of the
petitioner is clear. The counsel argued that, even if
the entire contents of the video along with the write
up is accepted in toto, no offence is made out. In the

argument note, Sections 13 and 14 of the POCSO Act are
extracted. The counsel submitted that, to attract an
offence under Section 13(c) of the POCSO Act, the
essential element is that, there needs to be ‘indecent
or the obscene representation of the child’. The
counsel submitted that, the words ‘indecency and
‘obscenity’ have not been defined under the POCSO Act
or under the Indian Penal Code. In such situation, the
counsel takes my attention to Section 2(c) of the
Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act,
1986 by which indecent representation of women is
defined. The counsel also relied the judgments of the
Apex Court in Ranjit D. Udeshi v. State of Maharashtra
(AIR 1965 SC 881) and in Samaresh Bose & Anr. V. Amal
Mitra [(1985)4 SCC 289] to contend that, there is no
indecency or obscenity even if the entire allegations
against the petitioner are accepted. The counsel also
relied the judgment of the Apex Court in Aveek Sarkar
v. State of West Bengal [(2014)4 SCC 257]. The counsel
for the petitioner relied two judgments of this court
also which is reported in P.P. Harris v. S.I. of Police
[2017(2) KLT 437] and Felix v. Gangadharan [2018(3) KLT
B.A. NOS.3861 & 4041 OF 2020 10
404]. The relevant portion of the judgment in Felix’s
case (supra) is quoted in detail in the argument note.
According to the counsel, morality of the most puristic
brahmanic society or the society that craves to be
travelling back to the pre-Constitution Brahmin
dominate era cannot be the touchstone for deciding the
criminal act of indecency or obscenity. The crux of the
argument of the petitioner is that, video cannot be
watched in isolation as well without understanding the
message which is being conveyed through the video as
well as the write up along with the video. According to
the counsel there is no indecency or obscenity involved
in the video. Much less, according to the counsel,
there is no indecent or obscene representation of the
children. According to the counsel, going by the
literal meaning of the provision, the offence is not
attracted. The counsel extracted Section 67B of the
Information Technology Act,2000 also in the argument
note and contended that, the offence under Section
67B(d) is also not made out in this case. Section 75 of
the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)
Act, 2015 is also extracted and contended that, the

offence under Section 75 is also not attracted. The
counsel for the petitioner submitted that, there are
two other cases registered against the petitioner as
Crime No.2405 of 2018 by the Pathanamthitta Police
Station and Crime No.334 of 2020 by the Ernakulam South
Police Station. According to the counsel, these cases
including the present case have been preferred by Right
Wing Puritan Advocates either associated with the BJP
or the Sangh Parivar, who wanted to either gain
publicity or wanted to make sure that the petitioner is
harassed for having taken a stand in favour of the
gender equality she has been pursuing throughout her
life. The counsel submitted that, the custody of the
petitioner is not required in the facts and
circumstances of the case.
10. The learned Public Prosecutor filed an
objection to the Bail application on 1.7.2020.
Thereafter, the Public Prosecutor submitted an argument
note, also refuting the submissions of the counsel for
the petitioner. The Public Prosecutor denied each and
every contention of the petitioner with certain
authorities from this Court, the Supreme Court, and

even decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court. The counsel
who appeared for the additional respondent also filed a
detailed argument notes refuting the submission of the
petitioner. He also supported the contentions of the
Public Prosecutor.
11. This is an application under Section 438
Cr.P.C. It is a settled position that while considering
an application under Section 438 Cr.PC, a detailed
discussion about the merit of the case is not
necessary. But in this case, the counsel for the
petitioner argued that no offence is made out even if
the entire allegations against the petitioner is
accepted. The counsel argued that the ingredients of
the offence are not made out. When the petitioner's
counsel argued in such a fashion, I am forced to decide
whether there is any offence prima facie made out in
this case. But I make it clear that my decision on
merit is only to decide this Bail Application. The
Investigating Officer is free to investigate the matter
in accordance to the law. The Investigating Officer or
the trial court (if any final report is filed) should
consider the case untrammeled by any of the

observations in this case. I once again reiterate that
I am forced to make the following observations only to
answer the contentions of the petitioner.
12. The offences alleged in this case are mainly
the offences under POCSO Act, 2012, Juvenile Justice
(Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, and under
the provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
13. The POCSO Act, 2012 was received the assent of
the His Excellency, the President of India, on
19.06.2012, and it was published in the Gazette of
India on 20.06.2012. A reading of the statement of
objects and reasons of the POCSO Act is relevant here.
Article 15(3) of the Constitution, inter alia, confers
upon the State powers to make special provisions for
children. Article 39 of the Constitution, inter alia,
provides that, the State shall, in particular, direct
its policy towards securing that, the tender age of
children are not abused and their childhood and youth
are protected against exploitation and they are given
facilities to develop in a healthy manner and in
conditions of freedom and dignity. The United Nations
Convention on the Right of Children, ratified by India
B.A. NOS.3861 & 4041 OF 2020 14
on 11th December,1992, requires the State parties to
undertake all appropriate national and bilateral and
multilateral measures to prevent the exploitative use
of children in pornographic performances and materials.
The POCSO Act was enacted by the parliament because of
the increasing sexual offences against children, which
are not adequately addressed by the other laws. The
POCSO Act is enacted as comprehensive legislation,
inter alia, to provide for the protection of children
from the offences of sexual assault, sexual harassment,
and pornography with due regard for safeguarding the
interest and wellbeing of the child at every stage of
the judicial process incorporating child friendly
procedure for reporting, recording of evidence,
investigation, and trial of the offences and provision
for establishment of special courts for speedy trial of
such offences. With such salutary objects POCSO Act was
enacted.
14. In this case, the allegation against the
petitioner is that she asked her children, aged 14 and
8 to paint on her naked body. In the video, the
petitioner was lying naked and her two children, a boy

and a girl aged 14 and 8 are painting on her naked
body. This video was shot by the petitioner and
uploaded in social media. According to the petitioner,
she is teaching sex education to her children by
uploading the video! I can understand if the mother is
doing these activities inside the four walls of her
house. It is the freedom of every mother to teach sex
education according to her will if it is not forbidden
by law. Whether such a video can be uploaded in social
media and the petitioner can escape by saying that she
was trying to teach sex education to all children is
the question to be decided. Whether any offence is
attracted in such cases, is the question. Section 13 of
the POCSO Act is one of the section alleged against the
petitioner, which is extracted hereunder:
“13. Use of child for pornographic purposes:
Whoever, uses a child in any form of media
(including programme or advertisement telecast by
television channels or internet or any other
electronic form or printed form, whether or not such
programme or advertisement is intended for personal
use or for distribution), for the purpose of sexual
gratification, which includes-
(a) representation of the sexual organs of a
child;
(b) usage of a child engaged in real or

simulated sexual acts (with or without penetration);
(c) the indecent or obscene representation of a
child,
shall be guilty of the offence of using a child for
pornographic purposes.
Explanation.- For the purpose of this section, the
expression "use a child" shall include involving a
child through any medium like print, electronic,
computer or any other technology for preparation,
production, offering, transmitting, publishing,
facilitation and distribution of the pornographic
material."[Emphasis supplied].
A reading of Section 13 of the POCSO Act, it is clear
that, whoever uses a child in any form of media for the
purpose of sexual gratification, it is punishable under
Section 14 of the Act. The main ingredient of the
Section is that, the child should be used in any form
of medium for the purpose of sexual gratification. In
Section 13(a) to (c) gives inclusive definitions.
Section 13(c) says that, the offence includes the
indecent or obscene representation of a child. Whether
the action of the petitioner amounts to an offence
under Section 13 is a question to be decided during the
time of the investigation. What is now available is
only an F.I.R. Whether an offence under Section 13 of
the POCSO Act is attracted in this case, is a matter to

be decided at the time of the investigation. Prima
facie, I am of the opinion that the petitioner uses the
children for the purpose of sexual gratification
because the children are represented in the video
uploaded in an indecent and obscene manner because they
are painting on a naked body of their mother. The
Public Prosecutor made available the video to me with
the consent of the counsel for the petitioner. I
watched the video. The expression of the petitioner,
while the children are painting on her breast, is also
important. Whether that amounts to the use of the
children for the purpose of sexual gratification can be
finally decided only after a custodial interrogation of
the petitioner. The explanation to Section 13, it is
clearly stated that the expression of 'use a child'
shall include involving a child through any medium like
print, electronic, computer, or any other technology
for preparation, production, offering, transmitting,
publishing, facilitation and distribution of
pornographic material. These are the matters to be
investigated at the time of investigation. While
considering a Bail Application under Section 438 Cr.PC,

I am not in a position to say that, no offence under
Section 13, 14 and 15 of the POCSO Act is attracted in
this case.
15. Similarly, Section 67B (d) of the Information
Technology Act, 2000 is also alleged against the
petitioner. Section 67B of the Information Technology
Act,2000 is extracted hereunder:
“67B Punishment for publishing or transmitting
of material depicting children in sexually explicit
act, etc; in electronic form.-Whoever-
(a) publishes or transmits or causes to be
published or transmitted material in any electronic
form which depicts children engaged in sexually
explicit act or conduct; or
(b) creates text or digital images, collects,
seeks, browses, downloads, advertises, promotes,
exchanges, or distributes material in any electronic
from depicting children in obscene or indecent or
sexually explicit manner; or
(c) cultivates, entices or induces children to
online relationship with one or more children for and
on sexually explicit act or in a manner that may
offend a reasonable adult on the computer resource;
or
(d) facilitates abusing children online, or
(e) records in any electronic form own abuse or
that of others pertaining to sexually explicit act
with children,
shall be punished on first conviction with
imprisonment of either description for a term which

may extend to five years and with fine which may
extend to ten lakh rupees and in the event of second
or subsequent conviction with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to seven
years and also with fine which may extend to ten lakh
rupees:
Provided that provisions of section 67, section 67A
and this section does not extend to any book,
pamphlet, paper, writing, drawing, painting
representation or figure in electronic form-
(i) the publication of which is proved to be
justified as being for the public good on the ground
that such book, pamphlet, paper, writing, drawing,
painting representation or figure is in the interest
of science, literature, art or learning or other
objects of general concern; or
(ii) which is kept or used for bona fide
heritage or religious purposes.
Explanation.- For the purposes of this section
“children” means a person who has not completed the
age of 18 years.”[Emphasis supplied]
Section 67B(d) of the Information Technology Act says
that whoever facilitates abusing children online shall
be punished. The petitioner asked her children to paint
on her naked body. Thereafter, the petitioner uploaded
the video in social media. Whether the petitioner
committed an offence under Section 67B(d) is a matter
to be investigated. Prima facie, I am of the opinion
that it cannot be ruled out that, no offence under

Section 67B(d) of the Information Technology Act, 2000
is made out. These are the matters to be investigated
by the Investigating Officer after custodial
interrogation of the petitioner.
16. The counsel for the petitioner also contended
that Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2015 is also not
attracted. On this point also, I am not making any
observations at this stage. This matter is also to be
investigated by the Investigating Officer. I cannot say
at this stage that, the prosecution has established the
offence under Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care
and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 as alleged. The
Investigating Officer has to investigate the matter.
Investigating Officer submitted that, he wants the
custodial interrogation of the petitioner to complete
the investigation. In such situation, I am not in a
position to say that, custodial interrogation of the
petitioner is not necessary in this case.
17. According to the petitioner, she is teaching
her children sex education by uploading this video. As
I said earlier, if this painting on the naked body of

the petitioner happened inside the four walls of the
house of the petitioner, there cannot be any offence.
After watching the picture painted by the children, I
have no hesitation to appreciate the talents of the
children. They deserve encouragement. But not in the
way the petitioner encouraged them by uploading this
video. The petitioner, when shot and uploaded these
videos in social media, she also claims that she wants
to teach sex education to the children in the society.
I cannot accept this stand of the petitioner. I am
aware of the decision of the Apex Court in Samaresh
Bose and Another v. Amal Mitra and Another [(1985)4 SCC
289] in which the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed like
this:
“In our opinion, in judging the question of
obscenity, the judge in the first place should try to
place himself in the position of the author and from
the viewpoint of the author the Judge should try to
understand what is it that the author seeks to convey
and whether what the author conveys has any literary
and artistic value. The Judge should thereafter place
himself in the position of a reader of every age
group in whose hands the book is likely to fall and
should try to appreciate what kind of possible
influence the book is likely to have in the minds of
the readers. A Judge should thereafter apply his
judicial mind dispassionately to decide whether the

book in question can be said to be obscene within the
meaning of Section 292 IPC by an objective assessment
of the book as a whole and also of the passages
complained of as obscene separately. In appropriate
cases, the court, for eliminating any subjective
element or personal preference which may remain
hidden in the subconscious mind and may unconsciously
affect a proper objective assessment, may draw upon
the evidence on record and also consider the views
expresses by reputed or recognized authors of
literature on such questions if there be any of his
own consideration and satisfaction to enable the
court to discharge the duty of making a proper
assessment.”
I place myself in the position of the petitioner and
from the view point of the viewers of every age group
in whose hands this video is reached by uploading the
same by the petitioner. After applying my judicial
mind, I am not in a position to say that, there is no
obscenity in the video when it is uploaded in the
social media. I make this observation only for the
purpose of deciding this Bail Application.
18. The concept of mother in our society is always
great. The role of mother is always important in the
life of a child. The mother will be a pillar of
emotional support to the child. As a mother, it is her
duty and responsibility to be the emotional anchor of

their children so that they can face the storms of
life. The children are not born with a moral compass
and it is the job of parents, especially of the mother,
to build that compass for them. Be responsible enough
to teach and demonstrate the values that your kids need
in order to grow up as decent human beings. You are
also responsible for living your life according to the
same moral values that you preach, as that is the only
way kids will learn. The petitioner has got the freedom
to teach her child according to her philosophy. But,
that should be within the four walls of her house and
should not be forbidden by law. A good mother has
outstanding qualities. No one can replace her in life
to her children. Deep love for her children, sacrifice
and dedication, protection and security etc.. are the
qualities of a mother. When a baby is born, he is
totally unaware of the outside world. The mother plays
an important part in introducing him to the world. The
outlook that the child will form towards life depends a
lot on the mother. His attitude, his views – religious
or otherwise – his perspective on life and its goals
will all be gained from her. Eventually, he will mature
B.A. NOS.3861 & 4041 OF 2020 24
and perhaps form his own changed views. But in the
initial years, what the child learns from their mother
will always have a lasting impression on their mind. It
is usually said that, the mother will be the window of
the child to the world.
19. There may be a difference of opinion about
several verses of Manusmrithi. But the description of
mother in it is excellent for which there may not be
any controversy. In Manusmrithi, there is a verse
about mother and the English translation of the same is
almost like this:
“From the point of view of reverence due, an
Upadhyaya [A Guru who taught students in Gurukulam]
is tenfold superior to a mere lecturer, a father is a
hundredfold superior to a Upadhyaya, and a mother is
a thousandfold superior to a father"
(See Chapter 2 Sloka 145 in Manusmrithi)
20. In Holy Qur'an also, the greatness of the
mother is mentioned in Chapter 31, verse 14 and Chapter
46, verse 15. The English translation of the same is
almost like this:
Allah says in Sura huqman:
“And We have enjoined man in respect of his
parents – his mother bears him with faintings upon
faintings, and his weaning takes two years – saying :
B.A. NOS.3861 & 4041 OF 2020 25
"Be grateful to Me and to both your parents, to Me is
the eternal coming. (31:14)
And in Sura Ahqaf He says:
And We have enjoined on man doing of good to his
parents; with troubles did his mother bear him and
with troubles did she bring him forth; and the
bearing and the weaning of him was thirty months
(46:15)
In both the above verses, although both parents are
mentioned, the mother is singled out as she bears a
greater responsibility.
21. I made these observations only to explain the
role of a mother in the life of children. The
petitioner feels that, she should teach sex education
to her children. For that purpose, she asks her
children to paint on her naked body and then uploading
the same in social media. I am not in a position to
agree with the petitioner that she should teach sex
education to her children in this manner.
22. I once again make it clear that, I make these
observations in this order only to resolve the
contentions raised by the petitioner. The Investigating
Officer should investigate the matter untrammeled by
any of the observations in this order.
B.A. NOS.3861 & 4041 OF 2020 26
23. After hearing both sides, in my opinion, this
is not a fit case, in which the extraordinary
jurisdiction under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.can be
invoked.
24. Moreover, the jurisdiction to grant bail under
Sec.438 Cr.P.C has to be exercised on the well settled
principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Chidambaram P. v. Directorate of Enforcement (AIR 2019
SC 4198). The Anticipatory Bail is not to be granted as
a matter of rule and it has to be granted only when
court is convinced that exceptional circumstances
exists to resort to the extraordinary jurisdiction.
25. It is true that, there is no hard and fast rule
regarding grant or refusal to grant Anticipatory Bail.
Each case has to be decided on the basis of the facts
and circumstances of that case. In the light of the
general principles laid down in the above judgment and
considering the facts and circumstances of this case, I
am of the opinion that this is not a fit case in which
the petitioner can be released on bail under Sec.438
Cr.P.C. Hence Bail Application No.3861 of 2020 is
dismissed.
B.A. NOS.3861 & 4041 OF 2020 27
Bail Application No.4041 of 2020 is dismissed as
infructuous.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

Print Page

No comments:

Post a comment