A bail application was filed by an accused charged with rape and theft. The High Court rejected the plea of mistaken identity and noted serious criminal antecedents, holding that the petitioner could not be granted bail.
Bail application dismissed; petitioner continues to be in custody.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 28TH ASWINA, 1945
BAIL APPL. NO. 948 OF 2023
CRIME NO.820 OF 2022 OF IRINJALAKUDA POLICE STATION, THRISSUR
PETITIONER:
VIJAYAKUMAR @ BIJU AGED 37 YEARS S/O. NARAYANAN, AVANJIKKATTIL HOUSE, KIZHAKKANCHERY KANNAMULAM DESOM, KUNNAMKAD VILLAGE, ALATHOOR TALUK, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678541
BY ADVS. LEO LUKOSE ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL S.SREEDEV RONY JOSE KAROL MATHEWS SEBASTIAN ALENCHERRY DERICK MATHAI SAJI AKSHAY PAVAN
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 (THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, IRINJALAKUDA POLICE STATION, THRISSUR),
SRI NOUSHD K.A. (SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL.NO.948/2023
2
ORDER
Dated this the 20th day of October, 2023
This is an application for regular bail.
No.820 of 2022 of Irinjalakuda Police Station, Thrissur District, alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 451, 354, 376 and 394 of the Indian Penal Code.
BAIL APPL.NO.948/2023
3
basis of mistaken identity or purposefully on account of the fact that the petitioner has criminal antecedents and several theft cases are registered against him. It is also submitted that the allegation of rape may also not sustain as the only allegation is that the petitioner had inserted fingers to the private parts of the defacto complainant/victim. It is further submitted that the allegations are insufficient to attract the offence under Section 376 IPC. It is also submitted that no injuries have been noted to suggest that a gold chain worn by the defacto complainant/victim at that time had been taken away by breaking the chain. In other words, it is submitted that if the chain had been broken in the manner as suggested by the defacto complainant/victim, there would have been at least some injuries on the neck of the defacto complainant/victim.
BAIL APPL.NO.948/2023
4
Indian Penal Code. It is submitted that the statement of the defacto complainant/victim stands corroborated by the medical evidence and the statement of the doctor who examined the defacto complainant/victim immediately after the incident. It is pointed out that there is medical evidence indicating assault in the manner set out in the First Information Statement of the defacto complainant/victim. It is also submitted that the argument raised on behalf of the petitioner that this is a case of mistaken identity also cannot be accepted as C.C. T.V. footage and Section 27 recoveries would indicate that the petitioner was clearly involved in the matter. It is also pointed out that going by the First Information Statement of the victim, the manner in which the petitioner had committed the offence indicates that the allegations against the petitioner are extremely serious. It is also pointed out that there are eight theft cases registered against the petitioner and each of these cases involve commission of serious offences.
BAIL APPL.NO.948/2023
5
days in custody and that the continued detention of the petitioner is not necessary as the final report has already been filed in the matter. It is submitted that merely because the petitioner has criminal antecedents, he cannot be denied bail. It is also submitted that considering the serious nature of the offences alleged against the petitioner, it would be unfair to deny the petitioner a chance to properly defend himself at the trial and this would be impossible if he is continued in custody.
BAIL APPL.NO.948/2023
6
clearly show the petitioner at a nearby place on the date of commission of the offences. Therefore, I am not inclined to
grant bail to the petitioner.
The Bail Application stands dismissed.
Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE
csl
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the accused charged with rape and theft.
Whether the petitioner's criminal antecedents bar the grant of bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vijayakumar @ Biju
State of Kerala
Gopinath P.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
