Partly allowed

Ajay Raj, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC22 May 2024Bail Appl./1386/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. was dismissed but the court held that no coercive steps or arrest shall be taken for two weeks to enable the petitioner to file a petition to quash proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. given mediation and de facto marital status.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed but no coercive steps including arrest to be taken for two weeks pending filing of quashing petition.

Ajay Raj, Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.BADHARUDEEN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 22^ND DAY OF MAY 2024 / 1ST JYAISHTA, 1946 BAIL APPL. NO.1386 OF 2024

¶5

CRIME NO.1973/2023 OF ERNAKULAM NORTH POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶6

AJAY RAJ, AGED 24 YEARS S/O.RAJENDRAN C., THADALIL HOUSE, MANKANKUZHY P.O, MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690588

¶7

BY ADVS. KISHOR B. REGHUVARAN R. MAYA MADHU ROBIN JOS M. J.

¶8

RESPONDENT/STATE:

¶9

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

¶10

2 XXXXX XXXXX BY ADVS. RESMI NANDANAN

¶11

SRI. RENJITH GEORGE,SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶12

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

¶14

BAIL APPL. NO. 1386 OF 2024

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

Dated this the 22^nd day of May, 2024

¶17

This is an application for anticipatory bail filed under

¶18

Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C' for short) by the accused in crime No.1973/2023 of Ernakulam North Police Station, where the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Section 376(2)(n), 313, 323, 308 and 506 of IPC.

¶19

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶20

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that now the petitioner and the de facto complainant have been residing together as husband and wife after marriage. Hence, parties propose to file an application for quashing the criminal proceedings. Mediation agreement in this regard also has been placed.

¶21

Recording the submission, keeping the liberty to the petitioner to file a petition for quashing the proceedings,

¶22

BAIL APPL. NO. 1386 OF 2024 3

¶23

this bail application is dismissed.

¶24

Since the parties effected legal marriage and have been residing as husband and wife to be borne out from the mediation agreement, it is ordered that no coercive steps, including arrest of the petitioner, shall be effected for a period of two weeks, the period which is required for the filing of a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

¶25

Sd/A. BADHARUDEEN JUDGE

¶26

nkr

Ajay Raj, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Raj, 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

M.V. Joseph Vs State of Kerala

Samuel.M.C @Baby Vs State of Kerala

Manu a. Vs State of Kerala

Marakkar Vs State of Kerala

Aboobacker Vs State of Kerala

Bindhu@Jalajakumari Vs State of Kerala