Allowed

Shibu George v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC24 Jan 2022Bail Appl./30/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an order granting anticipatory bail to two accused persons implicated in a police station entry case alleging offences against a defacto complainant and her family. The Court allowed the application subject to conditions regarding bonds, cooperation, and non-interference. It noted Prima Facie that Section 354 IPC may not be attracted.

What did the court decide?

The petitioners are granted anticipatory bail subject to execution of bonds, cooperation with investigation, appearance as called for not interfering with witnesses, and not involving in other crimes.

Shibu George Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶4

MONDAY, THE 24^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 4TH MAGHA, 1943

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 30 OF 2022

¶6

CRIME NO.591/2021 OF KAMBALAKKAD POLICE STATION, WAYANAD DISTRICT

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 & 2:

¶8

1 SHIBU GEORGE AGED 45 YEARS S/O. VALAYIL GEORGE, VALAYIL HOUSE, PALLIKKUNNU P. O., KOTTATHARA VILLAGE, VYTHIRI TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT – 673 122.

¶9

2 DONAL GEORGE SHIBU AGED 17 YEARS S/O. SHIBU GEORGE, REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER SHIBU GEORGE, S/O. VALAYIL GEORGE, AGED 45 YEARS, VALAYIL HOUSE, PALLIKKUNNU P. O., KOTTATHARA VILLAGE, VYTHIRI TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT – 673 122.

¶10

BY ADV. AJITH KRISHNAN

¶11

RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:

¶12

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.

¶13

2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER KAMBALAKKAD POLICE STATION, WAYANAD DISTRICT – 673 121.

¶14

SMT. SEETHA .S. (SR.PP)

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

BAIL APPL. NO. 30 OF 2022

¶17

¶18

ORDER

¶19

This is an application for anticipatory bail.

¶20

Petitioners are accused in Crime No.591 of 2021 of Kambalakkad Police Station, Wayanad District, alleging commission of offences under Sections 341, 323, 324 and 354 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners attacked the defacto complainant and her family, including minor children, on account of some dispute regarding parking of a car. It is submitted that the petitioners also attempted to outrage the modesty of the de-facto complainant.

¶21

The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are totally innocent in the matter and actually the petitioners were attacked brutally by the de-facto complainant and her men, when they questioned the parking of her car in front of their house. It is submitted that the only nonbailable offence alleged against the petitioners is that under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code and even assuming that all the allegations of the de-facto complainant are true, the offence under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code is not attracted as

¶22

BAIL APPL. NO. 30 OF 2022

¶23

¶24

no use of any criminal force or assault to outrage her modesty, is alleged.

¶25

Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also. The learned Public Prosecutor has taken me through the First Information Statement given by the de-facto complainant and has explained the circumstances of the case appearing against the petitioners. It is also pointed out that the grant of bail at this stage may not be conducive to the prosecution.

¶26

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and prima facie being satisfied that the offence under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code may not be attracted and also considering that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners may not be necessary for a proper investigation into the matter, I am of the opinion that the petitioners can be granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions.

¶27

In the result, this bail application is allowed and it is directed that the petitioners shall be released on bail, in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.591 of 2021 of Kambalakkad Police Station, Wayanad District, subject to the following conditions:

¶28

BAIL APPL. NO. 30 OF 2022

¶29

¶30

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

¶31

(ii) Petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation and shall report before the investigating officer at 09.00AM on 01.02.2022 in Crime No.591 of 2021 of Kambalakkad Police Station, Wayanad District and thereafter, whenever called upon to do so;

¶32

(iii) Petitioners shall not attempt to interfere with the investigation or to influence or intimidate the defacto complainant o r any witness in Crime No.591 of 2021 of Kambalakkad Police Station, Wayanad District;

¶33

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

¶34

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No.591 of 2021 of Kambalakkad Police Station, Wayanad District may file an application before the Jurisdictional Court, for cancellation of bail. Any observation in this order regarding Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code is only prima

¶35

BAIL APPL. NO. 30 OF 2022

¶36

¶37

facie and only for the purpose of considering the entitlement of the petitioners for Bail. It shall not be construed as a finding by

¶38

this Court on that point.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

GOPINATH P. JUDGE

¶41

Shibu George v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shibu George 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

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shaji Vs State of Kerala

Manikandan, Vs State of Kerala

Swathi Vs State of Kerala

Vimal K.P. Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Nazar Vs State of Kerala

Minimol Shaji Vs State of Kerala