Kerala High Court: Anticipatory Bail Not Guaranteed by Lack of Custodial Interrogation Need

The Kerala High Court recently ruled that anticipatory bail cannot be granted solely on the ground that custodial interrogation of the accused is not required. This decision came while denying pre-arrest bail to a teacher accused under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act) in the case of Prabhakaran P v State of Kerala & Anr.

Factors for Bail Consideration

The Court emphasized that multiple factors must be considered when evaluating a bail application, including the existence of a prima facie case, the nature of the offence, and the severity of the punishment. The non-requirement of custodial interrogation alone is insufficient for granting anticipatory bail.

Misconceptions About Anticipatory Bail

Justice A Badharudeen pointed out a common misconception that anticipatory bail should be granted if custodial interrogation is not needed. He clarified that this is just one aspect and should not be the deciding factor in bail decisions.

“There appears to be a serious misconception of law that if no case for custodial interrogation is made out by the prosecution, then that alone would be a good ground to grant anticipatory bail. Custodial interrogation can be one of the relevant aspects to be considered along with other grounds while deciding an application seeking anticipatory bail,” the Court stated.

Case Background

The Court considered an anticipatory bail plea filed by a 65-year-old teacher and principal of a tuition center accused of sexually harassing a 9th-standard student. He was booked under various offences, including the Indian Penal Code (IPC), POCSO Act, and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

Arguments and Decision

The Senior Counsel for the accused argued the man’s innocence, citing a 38-year career without allegations. However, the victim’s counsel and the public prosecutor opposed bail, arguing that the evidence showed a prima facie case requiring custodial interrogation.

The Court noted that arrest and custodial investigation are crucial for a meaningful investigation and establishing charges.

Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, Other Courts, International