Allowed

Viji v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC12 Jun 2023Bail Appl./1624/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application regarding alleged assault causing burn injuries to an 11-year-old victim, the court granted bail with stringent monitoring conditions to ensure victim safety and investigation cooperation, including regular appearances by the accused and reports from the Child Welfare Committee.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail upon executing bond of Rs 1,00,000/- each with sureties, surrendering within two weeks, cooperating with investigation, and complying with conditions of periodic reporting

Viji Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

B.A.No.1624/23

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

¶6

MONDAY, THE 12^TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 22ND JYAISHTA, 1945

¶7

BAIL APPL. NO. 1624 OF 2023

¶8

CRIME NO.153/2022 OF Pangode Police Station,

¶9

Thiruvananthapuram

¶10

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTCRMC 811/2022 OF DISTRICT COURT &

¶11

SESSIONS COURT,TRIVANDRUM

¶12

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 & 2:

¶13

1 XXXXXXXXXX

¶14

XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX

¶15

2 XXXXXXXXXX

¶16

XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX

¶17

BY ADVS.

¶18

R.N.SANDEEP KEERTHI VIJAYAN

¶19

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS:

¶20

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031.

¶21

2 THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PANGODE POLICE STATION VAMANAPURAM - CHITTAR RD, PANGODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 609.

¶22

BY SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶23

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

B.A.No.1624/23

O R D E R

The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.153 of 2022 of Pangode Police Station. Offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 324 and 506(ii) read with Section 34 IPC, and also under Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2015.

¶28

The prosecution case is as follows: The victim is a boy aged 11 years and is the son of the 1st accused. The 2nd accused is the stepfather. The allegation is that, on 09.03.2022 at about 4.30 P.M., the 2nd accused heated a spatula and gave it to the 1st accused, who in turn placed it on the buttocks of the victim, and he sustained burn injuries upon him. The crime was registered after the school teacher noticed the injuries, and the matter was reported. As the petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with the investigation of the same, this application for anticipatory bail is submitted.

¶29

Heard Sri.R.N.Sandeep, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri.C.S.Hrithwik, learned Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶30

B.A.No.1624/23

¶31

¶32

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent of all the allegations and denies the entire allegation of assault against the victim. Petitioners submit that they are prepared to abide by any of the conditions imposed by this Court and shall cooperate with the investigation. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor stoutly opposed the application. The investigation, in this case, is not completed so far, and the investigation revealed that the victim child was subjected to physical and mental cruelty by the petitioners. He was not even given proper food on several occasions. Consequent to the aforesaid aspect, the child was initially taken to the children’s home at the instance of the Child Welfare Committee. Subsequently, after considering all the material aspects and the request placed before it, the Child Welfare Committee has released the child to the custody of the grandmother. The learned Public Prosecutor stoutly opposed the bail application by pointing out that there is every probability that the petitioners may repeat the offence. Dismissal of the bail application was sought in such circumstances.

¶33

I have gone through the records and heard the contentions put forward by both sides. From the materials

¶34

B.A.No.1624/23 4

¶35

placed before me, it is evident that there are allegations of repeated assaults committed upon the child. However, considering the nature of the allegations, and the relationship between the parties, I am of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioners may not be necessary. The purpose of the investigation would be served if the cooperation of the petitioner with the investigation is ensured, for which the petitioner has to surrender before the investigating officer. As rightly pointed out by the learned Public Prosecutor, even while granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners, it should be ensured that the victim is not subjected to any ill-treatment from the part of the petitioners herein as well. After considering all the relevant aspects, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this application with the following conditions:-

¶36

(i) The petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating officer, within a period of two weeks from today, for subjecting themselves to interrogation.

¶37

(ii) After interrogation, the petitioners shall be released on bail on the very same day of surrender, upon the petitioners executing a bond for Rs 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the investigating officer.

¶38

B.A.No.1624/23

¶39

¶40

(iii) The petitioners shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting themselves to the deemed police custody for the purpose of recovery, if any, as and when demanded.

¶41

(iv) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m. every Thursday until the filing of the final report.

¶42

(v) The petitioners shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required. (vi) The Investigating Officer shall ensure to get periodical reports from the Child Welfare Committee concerned, as to the status/living condition of the victim, to rule out any possibilities of any further ill-treatment upon the child. The Child Welfare Committee shall also conduct necessary inspections so as to collect materials for submitting the report before the Investigating Officer. This arrangement shall continue for a period of three months.

¶43

(vii) The petitioners shall not commit any offence of similar nature while on bail.

¶44

(viii) The petitioners shall not influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

¶45

(ix) The petitioners shall not leave India without the permission of the trial Court.

¶46

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the

¶47

jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the

¶48

B.A.No.1624/23

¶49

¶50

application for cancellation of bail, if any, and pass appropriate

¶51

orders in accordance with the law.

¶52

Sd/-

¶53

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

¶54

JUDGE

¶55

DG/12.6.23

Viji v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Viji 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

Shine Daniel, Vs State of Kerala

Sujesh Sudhakaran, Vs State of Kerala

Xxx Vs State of Kerala

Sajeev Kumar K.P Vs Ameer Ali

Peter Sunder Dhas Vs State of Kerala

Syamjith K Vs State of Kerala