Hotel No.18 POCSO Case: Kerala High Court Denies Pre-Arrest Bail To Accused Roy Vayalat
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday dismissed the anticipatory bail applications moved by No.18 hotel owner Roy J Vayalat and his friend Syju M.Thankachan in a POCSO case where they have been accused of sexually assaulting a minor girl at the hotel. However, the third accused Anjali has been granted pre-arrest bail. Justice Gopinath P granted pre-arrest to the third accused subject to...
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday dismissed the anticipatory bail applications moved by No.18 hotel owner Roy J Vayalat and his friend Syju M.Thankachan in a POCSO case where they have been accused of sexually assaulting a minor girl at the hotel. However, the third accused Anjali has been granted pre-arrest bail.
Justice Gopinath P granted pre-arrest to the third accused subject to conditions considering the fact that she is a woman aged 24 years.
The order was pronounced after having heard both sides over the course of one week.
The incident came to light after the girl's mother registered a case against Roy, his friends Syju M.Thankachan and Anjali. Incidentally, Roy and Syju were also accused in a fatal car crash case where two prominent models died on the spot after crashing into a tree.
According to the complaint, Roy had sexually assaulted the girl in his hotel and recorded the incident on his cellphone weeks before the car accident. Anjali was accused of having taken the girls to the hotel and drugging them.
The POCSO case was handed over to the Special Investigation Team investigating the car crash case. As such, the petitioners moved the Court seeking pre-arrest bail.
During the hearing, the Public Prosecutor and Additional General of Prosecution had argued that the petitioner was not cooperating with the investigation and demanded that they be questioned in police custody. The Court was also informed that they had taken the confidential statement of the complainant, i.e. the girl's mother.
Meanwhile, the petitioners had disputed that the complainant was implicating them in false cases through media as a retaliation for a dispute between them. She was further accused of attempting to commit financial fraud. Evidence related to the cases against the complainant will be submitted before the court, added the lawyer.
Roy and the other accused had also sought an interim relief of protection from arrest. However, the Judge was not inclined to provide the same.
The petitioners were represented by Advocates Saiby Jose Kidangur, Peeyus A Kottam, Benny Antony Parel, Anoop Sebastian, Pramitha Augustine, Irine Mathew, Adithya Kiran V.E, Anjali Nair and Adolphin Mamachan.
Case Title: Roy J. Vayalat v. State of Kerala