Disposed

Suresh K. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC29 Jun 2016Bail Appl./4283/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a pre-arrest bail application. It observed that the complaint alleged assault but lacked the necessary sexual intent for an offence under Section 354 IPC. Other charges were deemed bailable. The court directed petitioners to seek regular bail from the magistrate.

What did the court decide?

Liberty given to petitioners to approach the learned Magistrate for regular bail.

Suresh K. Vs State of Kerala — Narcotics (NDPS) | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/8TH ASHADHA, 1938 Bail Appl..No. 4283 of 2016 () -------------------------------

¶5

CRIME NO. 538/2016 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION , KASARGOD

¶6

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED 1 TO 3: -----------------------------

¶7

1. SURESH K. AGED 35 YEARS, S/O. H. KANNAN, KUNDARA, AMBALATHARA VILLAGE, P.O. ACHIKANAM, KASARGOD DISTRICT.

¶8

2. SUDHEESH K. AGED 19 YEARS, S/O. SUDHA, KUNDARA, AMBALATHARA VILLAGE, P.O. ACHIKANAM, KASARGOD DISTRICT.

¶9

3. SUMA, AGED 29 YEARS, W/O. SASI, KUNDARA, AMBALATHARA VILLAGE, P.O. ACHIKANAM, KASARGOD DISTRICT

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS SRI.K.M.MUHAMMED HUSSAIN

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE: --------------------

¶12

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM REPRESENTING S.H.O. HOSDURG POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD DIST. PIN- 671 321.

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. LALIZA T.Y.

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

¶16

P.UBAID, J.

¶17

- - - - B.A.No. 4283 of 2016

¶18

- - - - Dated this the 29^th day of June, 2016

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The petitioners herein seek pre-arrest bail on the apprehension of arrest in Crime No. 538 of 2016 of the Hosdurg Police Station, registered under Sections 341, 323, 354 and 506(i) of the Indian Penal Code. They apprehend remand to judicial custody in view of the allegation under Section 354 of IPC.

¶21

On a perusal of the complaint, I find that what is prominently alleged is a case of assault. It is well settled that a mere assault on a woman will not by itself constitute an offence under Section 354 of IPC. For such a prosecution, there must be some sexual intent. I do not find any such element in the present complaint. The other offences are bailable under the law. I feel that the petitioner can very well surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail.

¶22

B.A.No. 4283 of 2016

¶23

-2-

¶24

Giving liberty to the petitioners to approach the

¶25

learned Magistrate or the Special Court, as the case may be,

¶26

for regular bail, this application is disposed of.

Sd/- P.UBAID

JUDGE

//True copy//

P.A. to Judge

Suresh K. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh K. 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

Fazalu Rahman K.K Vs the State of Kerala

Prabhu Krishnan Vs State of Kerala

Deepak Vs State of Kerala

Suresh Vs State of Kerala

Sujith Vs State of Kerala

Shahul Hameed.C.a Vs State of Kerala