Disposed

Retheepkumar.R v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC13 Jun 2023Bail Appl./2972/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Kerala High Court disposed of an anticipatory bail application filed by an accused in domestic assault offences. The trial court of the High Court granted bail on surrender subject to strict conditions for interrogation and post-interrogation release.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted after surrender, subject to execution of a bond of Rs 1,00,000/- with two sureties and strict appearance conditions.

Retheepkumar.R Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 23RD JYAISHTA, 1945

¶4

BAIL APPL. NO. 2972 OF 2023

¶5

CRIME NO. 68 OF 2023 OF KOTTARAKKARA POLICE STATION, KOILLAM

¶6

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶7

RETHEEPKUMAR.R
AGED 37 YEARS
S/O.G.RAJASEKARAN PILLAI,
POONTHOTTATHIL PUTHEN VEEDU, VENMANNOOR,
NEDUVATHOOR, KOTTARAKKARA,
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691505
BY ADVS.
N.P.PRADEEP
M.AJITH (KARICODE)

¶8

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶9

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

¶10

OTHER PRESENT:

¶11

ADV.C.S.HRITHWIK SR.PP

¶12

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
13.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

B.A No. 2972 OF 2023 2

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

Dated this the 13^th day of June, 2023

¶16

The petitioner is the accused in crime No. 68/2023 of Kottarakkara Police Station, Kollam, which was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 294(b), 324, 326 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

The prosecution case is as follows: On 31.12.2022, at about 08.15 hrs, the petitioner allegedly trespassed onto the property of the defacto complainant and beat his wife as well as the defacto complainant with a stick and thereby causing injuries. Consequent to the assault, the wife of the defacto complainant sustained a fracture of bone below the eye. It was also alleged that, during the assault, the wife of the defacto complainant lost her gold chain and sustained damages to the spectacle she was wearing at the relevant time. The crime was registered in such circumstances, and as the petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with the investigation of the said case, this application for anticipatory bail is submitted.

¶18

B.A No. 2972 OF 2023 3

¶19

Heard Sri. N. P. Pradeep, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. C.S. Hrithwik, the learned Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶20

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was falsely implicated in this case. According to him, certain civil disputes are pending between the parties. It is also submitted that immediately before the incident, which is the subject matter of the present crime, another incident occurred; in which the defacto complainant and his son attacked the petitioner and his family. The said incident occurred at 08.00 am on the very same day, and in connection with the said incident, Crime No. 69/2023 was registered by the Kottarakkara Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 294(b), 323, 324 and 354 r/w 34 of IPC, against the defacto complainant and his son. The incident, which is the subject matter of this case, occurred at 08.15 am, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, as the petitioner sustained injuries in the assault committed upon him by the defacto complainant and his son, as revealed from the FIR in Crime No. 69/2023, he availed the medical treatment. The defacto complainant falsely got registered the subsequent crime as a counterblast to Crime No. 69/2023. He also pointed out that the petitioner is ready

¶21

B.A No. 2972 OF 2023 4

¶22

to abide by any conditions that this Court may impose and shall cooperate with the investigation.

¶23

On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor opposes the aforesaid prayer by pointing out that there are specific allegations against the petitioner for assaulting the defacto complainant and his wife, thereby causing injuries. The matter is under investigation, and the dismissal of the application was sought.

¶24

I have gone through the records and heard the contentions raised by both sides. There are indeed allegations against the petitioner, but as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, another crime was also registered in connection with that incident which occurred just before the incident which is the subject matter of this crime, as is evident from Annexure-D FIR, in Crime No. 69/2023. Therefore, all these are the matters to be investigated. No criminal antecedents of the petitioner were brought to my notice. Admittedly, there are civil disputes between the parties, who are neighbours.

¶25

In such circumstances, I am of the view that the interest of justice would be served if the corporation of the petitioner with the investigation is ensured. In the facts and circumstances of the case,

¶26

B.A No. 2972 OF 2023 5

¶27

I do not find that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary.

¶28

In such circumstances, the application is disposed of on the following conditions:-

¶29

i ) The petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer, within a period of two weeks from today, for subjecting himself to interrogation.

¶30

ii ) After interrogation, the petitioner shall be released on bail on the very same day of surrender upon the petitioner executing a bond for Rs 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties each for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer

¶31

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

¶32

iv) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m every Saturday until the filing of the final report.

¶33

v ) The petitioner shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required by him.

¶34

vi) The petitioner shall not commit any offence of similar nature while on bail.

¶35

B.A No. 2972 OF 2023 6

¶36

vii) The petitioner shall not make any attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

¶37

viii) The petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the Jurisdictional Court.

¶38

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Magistrate shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE

¶41

mtk

Retheepkumar.R v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Retheepkumar.R 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

Viji Vs State of Kerala

Sajeev Kumar K.P Vs Ameer Ali

Peter Sunder Dhas Vs State of Kerala

Narendra K.Savla Vs State of Kerala

Ramani , Vs State of Kerala

Sachin Sukmaran Vs State of Kerala