Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Krishna Kumar Vs. State of Kerala

Krishna Kumar vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Nov 05, 2013
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1096720

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Right to Information

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Right to Information

Key legal issue
Right to Information

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Krishna Kumar

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....498(a) r/w section 34 of the indian penal code and section 119(1)(b) of the kerala police act, apprehend arrest and have filed this application.2. learned public prosecutor has submitted that the petitioners are alleged to have subjected the defacto complainant to cruelty. first petitioner threated to publish photographs and vedios affecting the privacy of the defacto complainant in the internet.3. learned counsel has submitted that allegations are false and that the second petitioner had handed over the mobile phone to the police but, they could not trace any such photograph.4. having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, i am inclined to grant relief to the petitioners 2 and 3 and issue directions, as regards the first petitioner. resultantly, this application is disposed of as under:1. it is directed that in case the petitioners 2 and 3 are b.a.no.7280 of 2013 2 arrested in crime no.1441 of 2013 of the thripunithura hill palace police station, they shall be released on bail, if not required to be detained otherwise on their executing bond for rs.15,000/- (rupees fifteen thousand only) each with two sureties each for the like sum each before the arresting officer and subject to the following conditions: (i) petitioners 2 and 3 shall report to the officer investigating the case at all reasonable time and place as directing by the investigating officer. (ii) petitioners 2 and 3 shall not intimidate/influence the witnesses. 2) first petitioner shall surrender before the officer investigating crime no.1441 of 2013 of the thripunithura hill palace police station on 11-11-2013 at 10 a.m for interrogation. a) if interrogation of the petitioner is not completed that day, he shall appear before the officer investigating the case on the day/days and time directed by him which the petitioner shall comply. b) first petitioner shall co-operate with investigating of the case. c) it is open to the first petitioner to move application b.a.no.7280 of 2013 3 for.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE5H DAY OF NOVEMBER201314TH KARTHIKA, 1935 Bail Appl..No. 7280 of 2013 () ------------------------------- CRIME NO. 1441/2013 OF HILL PALACE POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM ---- PETITIONERS/ACCUSED1TO3 -------------------------- 1. KRISHNA KUMAR, AGED32YEARS S/O.NARAYANAN POTTI, MANGATTU MADOM, MAMADI P.O.,PATHANAMTHITTA.

2. NARAYANAN POTTI, AGED61YEARS MANGATTU MADOM, MAMADI P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA.

3. KANAKAMANI AGED55YEARS W/O.NARAYANAN POTTI, MANGATTU MADOM, MAMADI P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT : ---------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SREEJITH V.S. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON0511-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: BP THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J --------------------------------------- B.A.No.7280 of 2013 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of November, 2013 ORDER

Petitioners are accused Nos. 1 to 3, in Crime No.1441 of 2013 of the Thripunithura Hill Palace Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A) r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 119(1)(b) of the Kerala Police Act, apprehend arrest and have filed this application.

2. Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that the petitioners are alleged to have subjected the defacto complainant to cruelty. First petitioner threated to publish photographs and vedios affecting the privacy of the defacto complainant in the Internet.

3. Learned counsel has submitted that allegations are false and that the second petitioner had handed over the Mobile Phone to the Police but, they could not trace any such photograph.

4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant relief to the petitioners 2 and 3 and issue directions, as regards the first petitioner. Resultantly, this application is disposed of as under:

1. It is directed that in case the petitioners 2 and 3 are B.A.No.7280 of 2013 2 arrested in Crime No.1441 of 2013 of the Thripunithura Hill Palace Police Station, they shall be released on bail, if not required to be detained otherwise on their executing bond for Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) each with two sureties each for the like sum each before the arresting officer and subject to the following conditions: (i) Petitioners 2 and 3 shall report to the officer investigating the case at all reasonable time and place as directing by the investigating officer. (ii) Petitioners 2 and 3 shall not intimidate/influence the witnesses. 2) First petitioner shall surrender before the officer investigating Crime No.1441 of 2013 of the Thripunithura Hill Palace Police Station on 11-11-2013 at 10 a.m for interrogation. a) If interrogation of the petitioner is not completed that day, he shall appear before the officer investigating the case on the day/days and time directed by him which the petitioner shall comply. b) First Petitioner shall co-operate with investigating of the case. c) It is open to the first petitioner to move application B.A.No.7280 of 2013 3 for bail before the learned magistrate with intimation given to the Assistant Public Prosecutor concerned at least three working days in advance. d) In case arrest of the first petitioner is recorded, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate on the same day. e) If for any reason custody of the first petitioner required, it is open to the officer concerned to move application before the learned magistrate. f) Learned magistrate shall dispose of the application(s) as above as early as possible having regard to the facts of the case. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE AS

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial