Allowed

Majeed P., v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Feb 2024Bail Appl./340/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a bail application filed by an accused charged with rape and cheating. Although the court noted the serious nature of the offense and the substantial progress in investigation, it granted bail subject to stringent conditions including alternating appearance before the IO, prohibition on contacting the victim, restriction on movement within Kerala, and no interferen

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties; petitioner must appear before IO on alternate Fridays and cannot visit victim, witness, or leave Kerala without permission.

Majeed P., Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 19TH MAGHA, 1945
BAIL APPL. NO. 340 OF 2024

¶5

CRIME NO.1748/2023 OF Hosdurg Police Station, Kasargod
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CMP 10051/2023 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
OF FIRST CLASS -I,HOSDRUG

¶6

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶7

MAJEED P.,
AGED 50 YEARS
S/O.YOUSEF, HOSDURG KADAPPURAM, KANHANGAD, HOSDURG
TALUK, PIN - 671315
BY ADVS.
S.RAJEEV
V.VINAY
M.S.ANEER
PRERITH PHILIP JOSEPH
ANILKUMAR C.R.
K.S.KIRAN KRISHNAN

¶8

RESPONDENT/STATE:

¶9

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

¶10

OTHER PRESENT:

¶11

SRI. RENJITH GEORGE -SR.PP

¶12

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

BAIL APPL. NO.340 OF 2024

¶14

¶15

ORDER

¶16

This is an application for regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 filed by the sole accused in Crime No.1748/2023 of Hosdurg Police Station, Kasargode registered under Sections 370(4), 376(1) and 506 of IPC.

¶17

The prosecution allegation is that, on 15/12/2023 at 9.00am, the petitioner took the victim lady in his car to a coconut garden at Choyankode, and forcibly committed rape on her.

¶18

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, the petitioner is a PTA member of the School, in which son of the victim is studying. When son of the victim was hospitalized due to an accident, the victim sought financial assistance from the petitioner, and he was helping her financially. When she continued her financial demands, he refused, and then she concocted a false case against him.

¶21

BAIL APPL. NO.340 OF 2024

¶22

¶23

The petitioner is in judicial custody from 17/12/2023 onwards.

¶24

Learned Public Prosecutor on instructions submitted that, investigation has progressed, substantially.

¶25

The victim is a lady aged 35, living with her husband and five children. At this stage, this Court is not able to ascertain the truth of the defence version, as it is a matter of evidence. Since the petitioner is in judicial custody from 17/12/2023 onwards, and investigation has progressed substantially, this Court is inclined to allow this petition, but on stringent conditions.

¶26

Hence, this petition is allowed on the following conditions:(i). The petitioner shall be released on bail on executing bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial court.

¶27

(ii) Thereafter, the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on alternate Fridays between 10.00am to 11.00am, starting from 17/2/2024, for a period of three months, or till the final report is filed, whichever is earlier.

¶28

BAIL APPL. NO.340 OF 2024

¶29

¶30

(iii) The petitioner shall not contact the victim, or cause any kind of harassment to her directly or indirectly.

¶31

(iv) The petitioner shall not go to the area of Kanhangad Village, where the victim is now residing.

¶32

(v)The petitioner shall not leave the limits of the State of Kerala without getting prior permission from the Trial Court.

¶33

(vi) The petitioner shall not influence or intimidate the witnesses or tamper with the evidence;

¶34

(vi) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail.

¶35

In case of violation of the bail conditions, the trial court is

¶36

empowered to cancel the bail in accordance with law.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

SOPHY THOMAS JUDGE

¶39

ska

¶40

BAIL APPL. NO.340 OF 2024

¶41

¶42

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 340/2024

¶43

PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure ITHE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
23.12.2023 IN CMP NO 10051/2023 ON THE FILE
OF JFCM, HOSDURG-I

Majeed P., v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Majeed 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

Rajesh . K Vs State of Kerala

Biju Michael, Vs State of Kerala

Ashik, Vs State of Kerala

Abi @ Abin Sabu, Vs State of Kerala

Suhail Vs State of Kerala

Benny Vargheese, Vs State of Kerala