Allowed

Shyne Raj v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Dec 2021Bail Appl./2722/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed anticipatory bail application against accused Nos. 1 and 3 in a crime alleging offences under IPC Sections 326, 354, and 506(ii) read with Section 34. Bail granted subject to conditions including daily reporting to police and depositing bonds.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed subject to conditions of daily reporting, bond of Rs.50,000 each with two sureties, and prohibition on contacting complainant or interfering with witnesses.

Shyne Raj Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

BAIL APPL. NO. 2722 OF 2021 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶5

FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943

¶6

BAIL APPL. NO. 2722 OF 2021

¶7

CRIME NO.3 OF 2021 OF NEYYARDAM POLICE STATION

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NOS.1 AND 3:

¶9

1SHYNE RAJ, AGED 38 YEARS
S/O. RAJAPPAN,S.S. VILASAM, THACHANKODU,
KUTTICHAL P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695574

¶10

2RAJAPPAN, AGED 56 YEARS
S/O. DAVID,S.S. VILASAM, THACHANKODU,
KUTTICHAL P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695574
BY ADV R.GOPAN

¶11

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶12

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

¶13

BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶14

SMT. SEETHA .S. (SR.PP)

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.12.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

BAIL APPL. NO. 2722 OF 2021 2

¶17

ORDER

¶18

This is an application for anticipatory bail.

¶19

Petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 3 in Crime No.3/2021 of Neyyar Dam police station, Thiruvananthapuram (Rural), alleging commission of offences under Sections 294(b), 323, 324, 326, 341, 354, 447, 506(ii) r/w.Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

The allegation against the petitioners is that, they trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant and attacked the husband of the de facto complainant and caused severe injuries on him and when the de facto complainant had attempted to intervene, she was also assaulted and a chain worn by her was broken and injures were also caused to her in the process.

¶21

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners and the de facto complainant are close relatives and the allegations are completely false. It is submitted that the non-bailable offences alleged against the petitioners are those under Sections 326, 354 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted that even if the entire statements in the First Information statement are accepted to be true, the same

¶22

BAIL APPL. NO. 2722 OF 2021 3

¶23

does not attract the offences under Sections 326, 354 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted that the allegations are raised only on account of other disputes between the parties. It is submitted that actually the petitioners were assaulted by the de facto complainant and her husband and though a complaint had been filed by the petitioners, the police did not register any case against the de facto complainant and her husband owing to their influence. It is also submitted that the petitioners had approached the jurisdictional Magistrate court with a private complaint and following a reference of the complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C, a crime namely, Crime No.171/2021 of Neyyar Dam police station has been registered against the de facto complainant and her husband. It is submitted that, at any rate, taking into consideration the nature of allegations, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not necessary in the matter.

¶24

I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor also. Learned Public Prosecutor has produced before me the wound certificate relating to the injuries of the husband of the de facto complainant and submits that serious injuries were caused to the husband of the de facto complainant in the alleged attack by the petitioners along with one other person. It is submitted that the contents of the wound certificate will suggest that the petitioners

¶25

BAIL APPL. NO. 2722 OF 2021 4

¶26

had committed the offence under Section 326 of the IPC. It is submitted that even the wound certificate in respect of the de facto complainant would also suggest her allegation that she was molested and a chain had been broken, is true. It is also submitted that grant of bail will affect the progress of investigation.

¶27

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegations, I am of the opinion that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners subject to strict conditions.

¶28

In the result, this application is allowed. It is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail, in the event of arrest in crime No.3/2021 of Neyyar Dam police Station subject to the following conditions:-

¶29

(i) Petitioners shall execute separate bonds for sums of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

¶30

(ii) Petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No.3/2021 of Neyyar Dam Police station every day at 09.00 am for a period from 20.12.2021 to 24.12.2021 and therafter, as and when called upon to do so. They shall co-

¶31

BAIL APPL. NO. 2722 OF 2021 5

¶32

operate with the investigation in every manner;

¶33

(iii) The petitioners shall not attempt to contact the de facto complainant or interfere with the investigation or to influence or intimidate any witness in Crime No.3/2021 of Neyyar Dam police station;

¶34

(iv) The petitioners shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

¶35

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No. 3/2021 of Neyyar Dam police station may file an application before the jurisdictional Court, for cancellation of bail.

sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE

ajt

Shyne Raj v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shyne Raj 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

X Vs State of Kerala

Sheffin T.Shajahan Vs the State of Kerala

Xxxx Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Rasheed Vs State of Kerala

Vincent Decruz Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Shareefa Ullath Vs State of Kerala