Allowed

Sandeep P.S. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Mar 2022Bail Appl./42/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala granted anticipatory bail to accused Nos. 1 and 2 involved in Crime No. 157/2021 facing charges of offences against women. The court imposed strict conditions to ensure investigation cooperation and non-interference.

What did the court decide?

The application was allowed. Petitioners released on bail subject to conditions including execution of bonds of Rs. 50,000 each, appearance before the investigating officer, no contact with the compla

Sandeep P.S. 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

FRIDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 20TH PHALGUNA, 1943
BAIL APPL. NO. 42 OF 2022

¶5

CRIME NO.157/2021 OF VANITHA POLICE STATION, KASARGODE, Kasargod
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CMP 3171/2021 OF DISTRICT COURT &
SESSIONS & MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ,KASARAGOD
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NOS.1 AND 2:

¶6

1SANDEEP P.S.
AGED 25 YEARS
S/O. SUNDARAN T.A., VALAPPIL VEEDU, PERUMBALA P.O.,
KASARGOD DISTRICT-671317.
2AKHILESH A.,
AGED 25 YEARS
S/O. KAMALAKSHI, SANJANKURI HOUSE, KUMBADAJE, KASARGOD
DISTRICT-671551.
BY ADVS.
SUBHASH CYRIAC
S.SREEJITH

¶7

RESPONDENT/STATE AND DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶8

STATE OF KERALA

¶9

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

¶10

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶11

BAIL APPL. NO. 42 OF 2022 2

¶12

ORDER

¶13

This is an application for anticipatory bail.

¶14

Petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.157/2021 of Kasargod Vanitha police station, alleging commission of offences under Sections 366, 354, 354(A)(1) r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

Allegation against the petitioners is that on 28.11.2021, at about 10.30 am, when the de facto complainant along with the her friend was travelling in a bus to Mangalore, the petitioners persuaded the de facto complainant and her friend to get into their car and they were taken to a place called Madikkery along with accused Nos.3 and 4. It is alleged that the petitioners compelled the de facto complainant to consume alcohol and also attempted to outrage the modesty of the de facto complainant.

¶16

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners and accused Nos.3 and 4 are students at Mangalore. It is submitted that all the accused and the de facto complainant and her companion are friends and they had voluntarily gone along with the petitioners. It is submitted that it is only when the mother of the de facto

¶17

BAIL APPL. NO. 42 OF 2022 3

¶18

complainant came to know of the incident, a false complaint has been lodged. It is submitted that at any rate, considering the nature of the allegations, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not necessary for a proper investigation into the matter.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the grant of bail. It is submitted that there are clear allegations against the petitioners. It is submitted that a clear picture of the incident will be revealed only after thorough investigation . It is submitted that the grant of anticipatory bail may not be conducive to the prosecution.

¶20

6.. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the petitioners are stated to be students , I am of the opinion that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners subject to strict conditions to ensure that they will co-operate with the investigation in very manner possible.

¶21

In the result, this application is allowed. It is directed that the petitioners shall be released on bail, in the event of arrest in crime No.157/2021 of Kasargod Vanitha police Station subject to the following conditions:-

¶22

(i) Petitioners shall execute separate bonds for sums of

¶23

BAIL APPL. NO. 42 OF 2022 4

¶24

Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

¶25

(ii) Petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No.157/2021 of Kasargod Vanitha Police station at 10.00 am on 17.03.2022, 18.03.2022 and 19.03.2022 and thereafter, as and when called upon to do so;

¶26

(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. 157/2021 of Kasargod Vanitha police station;

¶27

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

¶28

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No. 157/2021 of Kasargod Vanitha police station may file an application before the jurisdictional Court, for cancellation of bail.

¶29

sd/-

¶30

GOPINATH P.

¶31

JUDGE

¶32

ajt

Sandeep P.S. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep P.S. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arun.v.M Vs State of Kerala

Faizal Joseph Vs State of Kerala

Shonan M.P Vs State of Kerala

Abhilash Vs State of Kerala

Manoj Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Fasil Mandayappuram Vs State of Kerala