The petitioner may be given conditional anticipatory bail in each case that has been filed against him is upheld by the Kerala High Court in the case of Anez Anzare v. State of Kerala through Justice Gopinath P.
FACTS OF THE CASE
In the current instance, a defendant asked for anticipatory bail in four charges that had been filed against him.
In one of the cases, it was claimed that the de facto complainant had visited the petitioner’s bridal studio for cosmetics and that, while applying the foundation on her neck and other regions, the petitioner had inappropriately touched her on her private parts. Additionally, it was claimed that the petitioner improperly pulled the de facto complainant’s t-shirt.
Additionally, in another case, it was claimed that the petitioner made the de facto complainant stand before him in a sari blouse and underskirt alone while asking her a number of questions with sexual innuendos, including whether she had ever had a sexual relationship with her fiancé. He was also accused of touching her privately, violating Sections 354, 354A(1)(i), 354A(2), 354A(1)(iv) and 509 of the Penal Code, 1860.
Moving on to the other allegation, it was claimed that the de facto complainant had visited the petitioner’s makeup studio for bridal makeup, that the petitioner had, while pretending to apply makeup, inappropriately touched the de facto complainant’s private areas by putting his hand inside her blouse, and that he had sent her messages asking how she liked the make-up session and whether her husband was at home.
The petitioner allegedly began touching and groping the de facto complaint in another incident while pretending to show the de facto complainant about the studio. Later, the de facto complainant managed to escape the petitioner’s grasp and raced home to tell her mother and grandmother about the situation.
Overall, it was claimed that while applying the bridal makeup to the victims or the de facto complainants, the petitioner had made unwanted approaches and attempted to sexually assault them.
According to the Kerala High Court’s opinion, the petitioner may be given conditional anticipatory bail in each case that has been filed against him. The offences under Sections 354 and 354B of the Penal Code, 1860, were those that were registered against the petitioner in the cases.
Additionally, the Bench stated that the custodial questioning of the petitioner may not be required for a proper investigation into the offences brought against the petitioner, taking into account the accusations made against the petitioner. Therefore, the Court granted the bail requests subject to the following restrictions:
To the satisfaction of the arresting officer, the petitioner shall execute separate bonds for sums of Rs 1,00,000 each with two solvent sureties for the entire sum. Also, the petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation in every manner. Petitioner was ordered to give up his passport. In addition to this, the petitioner is forbidden from attempting to get in touch with the de facto complainants, getting in the way of the inquiry, or coercing or intimidating any witnesses. The Court said that while out on bail, he cannot commit any further crimes.
Accordingly, the bail was granted by the Kerala High Court.
PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into the category of Best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.
JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY NISHTHA GARHWAL