Subscribe
The Kerala High Court has granted bail to KK Padmarajan, a schoolteacher and former Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment in the Palathayi sexual assault case. The court held that there was prima facie an infirmity in the conviction order and that he had made out a “good case on merits” in his appeal.
A division bench comprising Justices Raja Vijayaraghavan V and KV Jayakumar passed the order on August 20 while considering Padmarajan’s application seeking suspension of his sentence pending his appeal against the November 2025 conviction by the Special Judge of the Fast Track Special Court, Thalassery.
The court’s order places considerable emphasis on what it described as inconsistencies in the evidence of the survivor, who was 10 years and six months old at the time of the alleged incidents. “On a preliminary analysis of the evidence of PW1, the victim, prima facie, we find that the victim had an inconsistent, embellished, improved and fanciful version about the alleged sexual abuse,” the court said.
The case relates to Padmarajan, who was the BJP’s former Thrippangottur panchayat president and a Malayalam teacher at a school in Palathayi, who was accused of taking the girl to a school washroom on multiple occasions and sexually assaulting her. According to the prosecution case recorded in the High Court order, the incidents allegedly took place on a day before January 15, 2020, and on January 15 and February 2 that year. The Panoor police registered a case on March 17, 2020, based on the girl’s statement.
The trial court had convicted Padmarajan under Sections 376(2)(f), 376AB and 354B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) (rape of a girl below 12, aggravated rape and assault) and Sections 5(f), 5(l), 5(m) read with Section 6 (aggravated penetrative sexual assault by a relative or person in authority, and against a child below 12) of POCSO. It sentenced him to imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life under Section 376AB of the IPC, besides 20 years’ rigorous imprisonment each for offences under the POCSO Act.
While considering the suspension of the sentence, the High Court focused on the alleged place of occurrence, noting that the school toilet was “very close to the classrooms” and that the school itself was situated on a small extent of property.
The bench also referred to differences in the medical evidence. The girl was initially examined by Dr Vasumathi, who did not record any evidence of sexual assault. A subsequent examination by Dr Poornima Prabhu could not conclusively establish that some of the injuries sustained by the victim were a result of sexual assault.
The court further noted that the investigation had been conducted by three separate agencies. The initial probe was by the local police and was later taken over by the Crime Branch. According to the order, the investigations arrived at “different conclusions about the alleged sexual assault by the applicant.”
The High Court also recorded the defence contention that there were material contradictions in the survivor’s statements, including differences concerning the alleged place of occurrence and other details of the incidents. These arguments were advanced by the defence in challenging the conviction.
The prosecution opposed suspension of the sentence, arguing that the trial court had properly evaluated the child’s evidence and that the medical evidence provided corroboration. The counsel appearing for the survivor’s mother also opposed the application, maintaining that the trial court had correctly found Padmarajan guilty after evaluating the evidence.
The High Court, however, found that the defence submissions warranted consideration.
“The contentions put forth by the learned counsel for the applicant are weighty and cannot be brushed aside in a cursory manner,” the bench said.
The court said it was “premature to enter into a conclusive finding” on Padmarajan’s claim of innocence but held that he had made out an arguable case in the appeal. “We are convinced that insofar as the conviction of the applicant is concerned, there is some infirmity in the order of conviction that renders the order of conviction prima facie erroneous,” it said.
The court consequently allowed the application and ordered Padmarajan’s release on bail pending the appeal, despite the life sentence imposed on him by the trial court.
The bail comes with stringent conditions. He has to execute a bond of Rs 1 lakh with two solvent sureties for the same amount. He has also been barred from entering the revenue district where the survivor resides.
The court prohibited Padmarajan from directly or indirectly contacting the survivor, her friends or relatives, or attempting to influence them. He has also been barred from making comments on social media, publishing or circulating material, or giving interviews concerning the case in a manner that could prejudice the survivor’s interests or the administration of justice.
He cannot leave the country without prior permission from the High Court. Any violation of the conditions could lead to the prosecution seeking cancellation of his bail.
The order is on suspension of the sentence pending the appeal and does not amount to an acquittal. Padmarajan’s conviction by the trial court continues to be under challenge before the High Court.
