Vinod Kumar v. State of Kerala

The Cyber Blog IndiaCase SummaryLeave a Comment

sexually explicit content

Vinod Kumar v. State of Kerala
In the High Court of Kerala
B.A. 811/2019
Before Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V.
Decided on February 18, 2019

Relevancy of the case: Bail application in a case involving rape allegations and forwarding of sexually explicit pictures

Statutes and Provisions Involved

  • The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 67A)
  • The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Sections 376(2)(n), 450)
  • The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Section 439)

Relevant Facts of the Case

  • The applicant is a neighbour and family friend of the complainant.
  • The complainant (victim) alleges that the applicant came into her home in June 2018 and gave her a soft drink which made her dizzy. Then, he allegedly raped her.
  • The applicant also took explicit pictures and videos from his mobile phone and started threatening the victim.
  • On numerous occasions, the applicant is alleged to have violated the victim. Finally, in December 2018, the victim was subjected to abuse.
  • When the victim objected to the applicant’s acts, he forwarded the explicit pictures and videos to her husband and friend.
  • The victim then lodged a complaint which led to the registration of the crime.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates

  • The petitioner’s counsel submitted that there was a consensual physical relationship between the parties. The complainant’s husband found explicit photos and videos on her mobile phone after which she started accusing the applicant of raping her.
  • Further, the applicant was arrested for the above crime on 21.12.2018, and further detention would be punitive.

Opinion of the Bench

  • The Court was of the view that, though the allegations are grave, the investigation had progressed to the final stages. The mobile phone of the applicant was seized and sent to the cyber lab for analysis. Further, the Court observed the gravity of the allegations, the stage of investigation and the period of detention undergone and decided that further detention of the applicant was unnecessary and stringent conditions imposed to safeguard the interest of the prosecution.

Final Decision

  • Bail granted, subject to conditions.

This case summary has been prepared by Mehula Liza Pallathu, an undergraduate student at the National University of Advanced Legal Studies, Kochi, during her internship with The Cyber Blog India in May/June 2021.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *