Allowed

Vishnu Prasad S P v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC2 Jun 2023Bail Appl./3026/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On an application for anticipatory bail in a case involving offences under Sections 376(2)(n), 354 and 506 IPC, the Court granted bail by fixing the petitioner to surrender, undergo interrogation, and be released on bail with a bond and sureties upon submission.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to surrender for interrogation within two weeks, be released on bail on bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties, cooperate with investigation, appear on Saturdays and as required, and not le

Vishnu Prasad S P Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 2^ND DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 12TH JYAISHTA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 3026 OF 2023

¶5

CRIME NO.231/2023 OF THUMBA POLICE STATION

¶6

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶7

VISHNU PRASAD S P AGED 25 YEARS

¶8

LITTLE HUT, KIZHAKKUM BHAGAM, KAZHAKKUTTAM P.O, MENAMKULAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695582 BY ADVS.

¶9

GOKUL D. SUDHAKARAN ARAVIND BABU A.S

¶10

RESPONDENT/STATE & COMPLAINANT:

¶11

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

¶12

2 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE THUMBA POLICE STATION, THUMBA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695583

¶13

ADV C S HRITHWIK -SR PP

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

B.A.No.3026/2023

: 2 :

ORDER

Dated this the 2^nd day of June, 2023

¶19

This is an application for anticipatory bail.

¶20

The petitioner is the accused in crime No.231/2023 of Thumba Police Station, which was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 354 and 506(1) of the Indian Penal Code.

¶21

The prosecution case is that, during the period from August, 2021 to January 2023, the petitioner had sexual relationship with the defacto complainant by making the promise of marriage and thereafter withdrawn from his promise. The crime was registered in such circumstances based on a complaint submitted by the defacto complainant on 14.03.2023. As the petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with the investigation of the said case, this application for anticipatory bail is submitted.

¶22

Heard Sri. Gokul D. Sudhakaran, the learned counsel

¶23

appearing for the petitioner and Sri. C.S. Hritwik, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶24

B.A.No.3026/2023

¶25

: 3 :

¶26

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations raised against the petitioner are baseless. According to him, the sexual intercourse between the parties was based on mutual consent. The aforesaid aspect is evident from the statement of the victim. Even though the sexual intercourse between the parties was from 2021 onwards, the complaint was submitted only in the year 2023. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, this indicates the false nature of the allegation. The learned counsel submits that the petitioner is prepared to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and shall cooperate with the investigation.

¶27

On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor

¶28

would oppose the aforesaid application. It is pointed out that there are allegations of sexual assault, as per the statement given by the victim before the Police and also before the learned Magistrate. It is further pointed out that the petitioner has criminal antecedents as he is involved in crime No.73/2023 of Sreekaryam Police Station, which includes the offence under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code. In response to the contention raised by the learned Public Prosecutor with regard to the criminal

¶29

B.A.No.3026/2023

¶30

: 4 :

¶31

antecedents of the petitioner, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid crime is already settled between the parties and all the proceedings are quashed.

¶32

I have gone through the records. The specific contention put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the sexual intercourse was based on mutual consent, as the parties were in a relationship. When going through the statement of the victim, it can be seen that there was a relationship between the parties. According to the defacto complainant, the sexual intercourse was made on the basis of the promise made by the petitioner to marry her. Later, it was learned that the petitioner was having a relationship with another woman. When carefully going through the statements given by the defacto complainant, it provides some indications of a sexual relationship based on consent. The said consent was allegedly obtained by making a false promise of marriage, which is a matter for investigation. From the materials now placed on record, I am of the view that some orders are to be passed to protect the personal liberty of the petitioner by imposing appropriate conditions to ensure that the petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation.

¶33

B.A.No.3026/2023

¶34

: 5 :

¶35

In such circumstances, this bail application is disposed of

¶36

with the following directions:

¶37

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

¶38

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

¶39

(3) 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.

¶40

(4) 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.

¶41

(5) The petitioner shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

¶42

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

¶43

(7) 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

¶44

B.A.No.3026/2023

¶45

: 6 :

¶46

persons related to the investigation.

¶47

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

¶48

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

¶49

Sd/-

¶50

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE

¶51

ncd

Vishnu Prasad S P v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishnu Prasad S P 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

Muhamnmed Sameer M Vs the Union Territory of Lakshadweep

Sajan Varghese Vs George Thomas

Dr. Janet Vs State of Kerala

Akhilraj Rs Vs State of Kerala Represented by the Public Prosecutor

K.P. John Vs State of Kerala

Rajesh Vs State of Kerala