Allowed

Febin v. Vs State of Kerala

Kerala HC9 Dec 2020CRL.A/892/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail appeal against conviction for rape and crimes under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the High Court of Kerala allowed the appeal and granted bail to the appellant, subject to specific conditions including execution of a bond and reporting to the investigating officer.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Appeal allowed; Appellant released on bail subject to execution of bond, no interference with evidence, and reporting.

Febin v. Vs State of Kerala — Caste Atrocities | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942

¶5

CRL.A.No.892 OF 2020

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMP 165/2020 OF SPECIAL COURT (ATROCITIES AGAINST SC/ST), MANJERI

¶7

CRIME NO.423/2020 OF MANKADA POLICE STATION,MALAPPURAM

¶8

APPELLANT/ACCUSED:

¶9

FEBIN V. AGED 37 YEARS S/O. MOIDEENKUTTY, VENGASSERY HOUSE, VADAKKANGARA P. O., MALAPPURAM DIST., PIN - 679324.

¶10

BY ADV. SHRI.T.K.AJITH KUMAR

¶11

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:

¶12

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MANKADA POLICE STATION, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 031.

¶13

2 DESIGNATED AS

¶14

VICTIM

¶15

AS PER ORDER DATED 24.11.2020 IN CRL.M.A.1/2020

¶16

SPL.GP - SMT.AMBIKADEVI S., PP- SMT. SYLAJAS.L.

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09.12.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

CRL.A.No.892 OF 2020 2

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

The offence alleged are under Sections 313,376 (2)(n) of IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the

¶21

Scheduled Casts and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The victim is a widow having one child. She was residing in the ground floor of the building on a rental arrangement. The upstair portion was occupied by the accused on a rental arrangement. He is a married person having three children. Both the

¶22

victim and the accused are aged 37. It is

¶23

alleged that medicines were administered so as to have a miscarriage and that has resulted in heavy bleeding. Thereon she was removed to

¶24

Hospital. Till that time no complaint was raised. The accused is under detention for the

¶25

last 75 days from 25/09/2020 onwards. It is

¶26

CRL.A.No.892 OF 2020 3

¶27

submitted that investigation is going on and nearing completion.

¶28

The alleged incident happened while the victim and the accused were residing in a rented house i.e. the ground floor and the upstair portion respectively. Both of them are married and aged 37 years at the time of alleged commission of offence. The victim had not made any complaint till the date of miscarriage by administering medicine. She was removed to hospital due to heavy bleeding. It is only at that time, the alleged incident was disclosed. The accused is a person having three children. His wife and children are depending on him for their livelihood, it was submitted. He was under detention for the last 75 days. As such, further detention not warranted. Hence the

¶29

order of the learned Special Court is liable to be set aside by granting bail, but subject to conditions that:

¶30

The petitioner shall execute a bond for

¶31

CRL.A.No.892 OF 2020 4

¶32

Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with

¶33

two solvent sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Special Judge.

¶34

The petitioner shall not involve in any

¶35

such offence in future and he shall not in any way tamper with the evidence involved in the case directly or indirectly.

¶36

He shall report before the investigation

¶37

officer on all Mondays in between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m till the submission of final report or

¶38

for a period of three months whichever is

¶39

earlier and shall co-operate with the investigation. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of Special Court without prior sanction.

¶40

Crl. Appeal is allowed accordingly.

Sd/-

P.SOMARAJAN

JUDGE

msp

CRL.A.No.892 OF 2020 5

¶46

APPENDIX

¶47

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶48

ANNEXURE 1

¶49

TRUE COPY OF THE FIR AND COMPLAINT IN CRIME NO.423/2020 OF MANKADA POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DT.

¶50

//TRUE COPY//

¶51

P.A. TO JUDGE

Febin v. Vs State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Febin v. Vs 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

Daniel Vs Shajan

Geejo Francis, Vs the State of Kerala

K.v.Gireesh Vs State of Kerala

Jamsheer, Vs State of Kerala

Ajil, Vs State of Kerala

Sunilkumar Vs Shaji