Allowed

Vinil Kumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC13 Jun 2018Bail Appl./2313/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by an accused facing rape allegations. The court found the victim aware of his marital status and doubted the false promise of marriage claim. It held custodial interrogation unnecessary and granted bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant to appear for interrogation and released on bail on bond of Rs. 40,000 with two sureties.

Vinil Kumar Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JUNE 2018 / 23RD JYAISHTA, 1940

¶4

CRIME NO. 41/2018 OF MARAYAMUTTAM POLICE STATION , THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶5

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED

¶6

VINIL KUMAR, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O. VIJAYAN, RESIDING AT PUNNAKKODU ROADARIKATHU VEEDU, PERINKADAVILA VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶7

BY ADV.SRI.R.NIKHIL

¶8

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE :

¶9

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

¶10

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MARAYAMUTTOM POLICE STATION, MARAYAMUTTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695124.

¶11

R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.N.PRABHAKARAN

¶12

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-06-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

¶14

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, J

¶15

B.A No.2313 of 2018

¶16

Dated this the 13^th day of June, 2018

¶17

ORDER

¶18

1.This application is filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

¶19

2.The applicant herein is the accused in Crime No.41 of 2018

¶20

of Marayamuttom Police Station, registered under Sections 376 and 312 of the IPC.

¶21

3.The applicant herein is a Contractor. The de facto complainant is the wife of his employee. It appears that they used to have constant contact over phone and they became close. Both the de facto complainant and the applicant are married. It is alleged that the applicant, on a false promise of marriage, took the de facto complainant to various places and subjected her to sexual intercourse. It is further alleged that the de facto complainant became pregnant and the applicant administered some medicines and caused miscarriage.

¶22

4.The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the allegations are without basis. Both being adults and persons who are able to take conscious decisions, the allegation of rape which is now alleged cannot be sustained

¶23

B.A No.2313 of 2018

¶24

¶25

is the submission. According to the learned counsel, there was an incident involving the husband of the de facto complainant and the applicant's wife and a complaint was lodged before the police.

¶26

5.The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer.

¶27

6.I have considered the submissions advanced and have gone through the case diary.

¶28

7.It appears from an overall reading of the complaint that both were having close acquaintance. The victim was aware that the applicant was a married person. She was also married and the allegation that the applicant had taken her to various places on a promise of marriage is difficult to accept.

¶29

8.Having considered the entire aspects, I do not think that the custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessitous for an effective investigation.

¶30

9.In the result, this application is allowed. The applicant shall appear before the investigating officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation. If necessary tests are to be conducted, he shall co-operate with the same. Thereafter, if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be

¶31

B.A No.2313 of 2018

¶32

¶33

released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.40,000/(Rupees forty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each

¶34

for the like sum. The above order shall be subject to the following conditions:

¶35

i)The applicant shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 10 a.m., for one month or till final report is filed, whichever is earlier.

¶36

ii)The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer.

¶37

iii)The applicant shall not commit any similar offence while on bail.

¶38

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the

¶39

jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the

¶40

application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, JUDGE

¶43

AD //True Copy\ P.A to Judge

Vinil Kumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinil Kumar 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

Pushpangadan Vs State of Kerala

Saifudheen Vs State of Kerala

Devadas P.K Vs State of Kerala

K.P. Preejith Vs State of Kerala

Shajahan Vs State of Kerala

Binumon @ Mani Vs the State of Kerala