Allowed

Remesh v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Jan 2017Bail Appl./199/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the petitioner, a priest accused of abduction and rape, allowing his release on a bond with sureties. The court noted the completion of investigation and recording of the victim's statutory statement as grounds for changing its earlier stance against bail.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail by executing a bond of Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like sum.

Remesh Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BABU

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY 2017/27TH POUSHA, 1938

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 199 of 2017 ()

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN Bail Appl. 9001/2016 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 23-12-2016

¶7

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CMP 6081/2016 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT - II, MAVELIKKARA DATED 15-11-2016

¶8

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:

¶9

REMESH

¶10

AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.REMANAN PILLAI, RAMESH BHAVANAM, ADINADU SOUTH PO, KS PURAM VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.N.VIMALAN

¶12

RESPONDENT(S):

¶13

STATE OF KERALA

¶14

REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682031

¶15

R BY ADV.MAYA M.N PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶16

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17-01-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

B.A.No.199 of 2017

¶18

Appendix

¶19

Petitioner's Exhibits

¶20

Annexure I-True copy of order dated 15.11.2016 in CMP No.6081/2016 of JFMC-I, Mavelikkara

¶21

Annexure II- True copy of order dated 23.12.2016 in BA 9001/2016 of this Hon'ble Court Annexure III-Copy of report dated 11.11.2016 submitted by the Sooranad police.

¶22

Respondent's Exhibits

Nil

True copy

sks P.A to Judge

A.M.BABU, J.

B.A.NO. 199 OF 2017

Dated 17^th January, 2017

¶29

ORDER

¶30

The accused accused of offences punishable under Secs 342,366 and 376 of the IPC is the petitioner. He is the accused in crime no.1296/2016 of Nooranad police station. He is in custody and seeks bail under Sec.439 of the Cr.P.C.

¶31

The prosecution case goes as follows: The petitioner is a priest in a temple. He is an astrologer too. He abducted the daughter of the de facto complainant on 8.11.2016. He took her to a temple. He by force tied a 'thali' around her neck against her wish and will and also ignoring her objection. Making her to believe that he married her, he committed rape on her on 10.11.2016.

¶32

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶33

This is the second bail application filed by the petitioner which comes before me. The earlier one was B.A 9001/2016. That application was dismissed on 23.12.2016.

¶34

¶35

I have on that day perused the case diary. I have seen materials in the case diary against the petitioner. But at that time the investigation was in progress. The statement of the victim under Sec.161 of the Cr.P.C was taken, but not a statement under Sec.164 Cr.P.C. The learned Public Prosecutor now submits that the statement of the victim under Sec.164 of the Cr.P.C has been recorded. It is also stated that the investigation has been completed and that the final report will be filed within a few days. The petitioner is in custody since 11.11.2016. Continued custody of the petitioner does not appear to be necessary in the circumstances mentioned above. I am inclined to grant him bail in view of the change of the circumstances.

¶36

In the result, the bail application is allowed. The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate who has jurisdiction to commit the case to the Court of Session. The petitioner shall not intimidate witnesses or try to influence

¶37

¶38

any witness. He shall not destroy evidence or tamper with it. The learned Magistrate/Sessions Judge is hereby empowered to cancel the bail if any of the conditions mentioned above is violated.

¶39

A.M.BABU Judge

¶40

sks/17.1.2017

Remesh v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Remesh 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

Naga @ Nagamma Vs State of Kerala

Jose C.T Vs State of Kerala

Rahila Beevi Vs State of Kerala

Kunnumal Jubairya Vs State of Kerala

N.J.George Vs State of Kerala

Binoy N.S. Vs State of Kerala