Allowed

Vipinkumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC19 Jul 2019Bail Appl./5117/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. where the court allowed the application for the petitioner accused of abetment to suicide and IT Act offences. The court granted bail on conditions due to the petitioner's clean record and limited role in the specific gravity of offenses.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on condition of executing a bond of Rs. 40,000 with two solvent sureties each for the like sum.

Vipinkumar Vs State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 28TH ASHADHA, 1941

¶5

Bail Appl..No.5117 of 2019

¶6

CRIME NO.448/2018 OF Venjaramoodu Police Station , Thiruvananthapuram

PETITIONER/S:

VIPINKUMAR

AGED 25 YEARS

S/O. RAVEENDRAN, MANIKANTA VILASOM, VENJAARAMOODU, MANICKAL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.P.ANOOP (MULAVANA)

¶12

RESPONDENT/S:

¶13

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA - 682031

¶14

OTHER PRESENT:

¶15

SMT.V.SREEJA,PP

¶16

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

Bail Appl..No.5117 of 2019

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The petitioner is the 4^th accused in

¶20

Crime No.448/2018 of Venjaramoodu Police

¶21

Station. The offences alleged are the offences punishable under Sections 306 and 506(i) read with Section 34 IPC and 67 and 67(A) of IT Act.

¶22

2. The prosecution allegation can be briefly stated thus:

¶23

The deceased Sudheesh married Neeraja

¶24

on 17/03/2018. On 18/03/2018, the first accused along with the petitioner and others went to the house of the deceased and threatened him that he would not be

¶25

permitted to live with Neeraja. The first

¶26

Bail Appl..No.5117 of 2019

¶27

-3-

¶28

accused also sent nude video clippings of Neeraja to the mobile phones of the deceased and his sister. It is alleged that the above said acts of the accused made the

¶29

deceased to commit suicide.

¶30

3. The petitioner has filed this application under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶31

4. Heard.

¶32

5. The learned Public Prosecutor has

¶33

submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. It is alleged that the petitioner also accompanied the first accused to the house of the deceased on

¶34

18.03.2018 and threatened the deceased. It

¶35

Bail Appl..No.5117 of 2019

¶36

-4-

¶37

has been fairly conceded by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner had no role in the matter of sending the nude video clippings of Neeraja to the mobile phones of the deceased and his sister. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that an order under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner will be justified in this case.

¶38

In the result, this application stands allowed and the respondent is directed to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in the above said crime on condition of the petitioner executing a bond for Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty thousand

¶39

only) with two solvent sureties, each for

¶40

Bail Appl..No.5117 of 2019

¶41

-5-

¶42

the like sum to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer concerned, before whom the petitioner shall surrender within ten days, if not arrested in the meantime and subject to the following further conditions:

¶43

i) The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer as and when required by the Investigating Officer for interrogation.

¶44

ii) The petitioner shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses or in any way tamper with the investigation.

¶45

iii) The petitioner shall not get involved in any other

¶46

Bail Appl..No.5117 of 2019

¶47

-6-

¶48

offence during the pendency of

¶49

this case.

¶50

Sd/-

¶51

B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, JUDGE

¶52

STK

¶53

//TRUE COPY//

¶54

//P.A. TO JUDGE//

Vipinkumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vipinkumar 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

Lekshmanan @ Thampi Vs State of Kerala

Kusan Vs State of Kerala

Raghavan Vs State of Kerala

Ashraf.a Vs State of Kerala

Al Ameen Vs State of Kerala

Riyas, Vs the State of Kerala