Allowed

Devassy Freddy v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Jan 2013Bail Appl./8631/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an interim bail application where the petitioner, accused of rape and other offences, was granted bail. The court noted the serious nature of allegations against a minor victim but concluded that continued custody was unnecessary as investigation progress was satisfactory and no flight risk was established.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with security of Rs. 25,000/- and two solvency sureties, and must surrender original passport.

Devassy Freddy Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JANUARY 2013/11TH POUSHA 1934

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 8631 of 2012 ()

¶6

(CRIME NO. 2836/2012 OF ALUVA EAST POLICE STATION)

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED :

¶8

DEVASSY FREDDY, AGED 22 YEARS S/O GEORGE, VAIVELY HOUSE, CHITTOOR CHERANALLOOR VILLAGE, KOCHI-27

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.T.B.SHAJIMON

¶10

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT :

¶11

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY S.H.O. ALUVA EAST POLICE STATION.

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. LALIZA T.Y

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMITION ON 01-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

P.BHAVADASAN, J.

B.A. No.8631 of 2012

Dated this the 1^st day of January, 2013

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The petitioner stands accused of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 342, 365, 376 and 420 of IPC. The allegation against the petitioner is that he had taken the victim to various places and subjected her to sexual intercourse.

¶20

The petitioner would say that the victim and he was in love and the victim had gone voluntarily along with him and there was no compulsion or inducement on his part. According to him the allegation of having taken her by force is without any basis. The petitioner further pointed out that he has been in custody from 31.10.2012 onwards and according to him, at any rate, his continued custody is unnecessary.

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the petition pointing out that the allegations are of serious nature and the victim is aged less than 18 years at the relevant time.

¶22

After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and after having perused the records, the claim of the petitioner that he is

¶23

B.A.No.8631/2012 :2:

¶24

innocent cannot be accepted. Of course, there is Annexure-C produced by the petitioner, which is a statement said to have been given by the victim before the learned Magistrate, which would show that she was in love with the petitioner. A deeper probe into the matter is unwarranted at this point of time. The petitioner has been in custody from 31.10.2012 onwards. A good part of investigation must have been completed by now and since no apprehension has been expressed by the investigating agency that if released on bail the petitioner is likely to abscond, it is felt that continued custody of the petitioner is unnecessary. In the result, the application is allowed and the petitioner is granted bail as follows:

¶25

(a)The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the JFCM-I, Aluva.

¶26

(b)The learned Magistrate may ensure the identity of the sureties and the veracity of the tax receipts, before granting bail.

¶27

(c) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Friday between 9 a.m. and 10 a.m. till final report is filed.

¶28

(d)The petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala without prior sanction of the learned Magistrate.

¶29

B.A.No.8631/2012 :3:

¶30

(e)The petitioner shall surrender his original passport before the learned Magistrate. If he is not having any valid passport, he shall file an affidavit to that effect before the Magistrate.

¶31

(f) The petitioner shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with the evidence and influence or try to influence the witnesses.

¶32

(g)If any of the condition is violated, the bail granted shall stand cancelled and the JFCM concerned, of being satisfied of the said fact, may take such proceedings as are available to him in law.

¶33

P.BHAVADASAN,

¶34

Judge.

¶35

okb.

Devassy Freddy v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devassy Freddy v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Subair Vs Sho, Valapattanam Police Station

Amrutheshwara.a. Vs the State of Kerala

Sharinlal Vs State of Kerala

Navas Vs State of Kerala

Devassy Kutty Vs State of Kerala

Rajesh Vs State of Kerala