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.

Gopu Vidhya Vs. State of Kerala

Gopu Vidhya vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jul 11, 2014
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1156285

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
Criminal

Case Summary

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

Criminal

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Gopu Vidhya

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....bangalore. after three months of filing of the o.p. in the family court, the first informant got this case registered. there is no allegation that any of the petitioners inflicted any serious injury to the first informant. it appears that reconciliation is not impossible. if the petitioners happen to be detained, it may become impossible. moreover, from the nature of the allegations, i am of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not necessary. in the result, this application is allowed. 1) the petitioners shall be released on bail on their executing a bond for rs.25,000/- (rupees twenty five thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum if they are arrested by the police in connection with this case. 2) they shall appear before the investigating officer b.a. no.5075 of 2014 -3- for interrogation if they are so required by him in writing. 3) they shall not destroy or tamper with evidence. 4) they shall not harass the defacto complainant or her relatives. 5) this order is not applicable if the petitioners choose to surrender before the magistrate concerned and in such case the learned magistrate may take appropriate action in accordance with the law. sd/- k. abraham mathew judge //true copy// p.a. to judge shg/

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW FRIDAY, THE11H DAY OF JULY201420TH ASHADHA, 1936 Bail Appl..No. 5075 of 2014 --------------------------------------- CRIME NO. 584/2014 OF KATTOOR POLICE STATION , TRISSUR ---------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. GOPU VIDHYA, AGED34YEARS, VIDYANANDABABU, RESIDING AT MIDAVELIL HOUSE, PERINGOL DESDAM, KAVUMBHAGAM VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA.

2. VIDYANANDABABU, AGED56YEARS, S/O. GOPUVIDYA, RESIDING AT MIDAVELIL, PERINGOL DESDAM, KAVUMBHAGAM VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA.

3. SHEELA VIDYA, D/O. VIDYANANDABABU, RESIDING AT MIDAVELIL HOUSE, PERINGOL DESDAM, KAVUMBHAGAM VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA. BY ADVS.SRI.P.VINODKUMAR T.K.AJITHKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KATTOOR POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.DHANESH MATHEW MANJOORAN THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON1107-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PJ K. ABRAHAM MATHEW, J.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No.5075 of 2014 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 11th day of July, 2014 ORDER

Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The petitioners are the accused in crime No.584/2014 of Kattoor Police Station, Thrissur District which has been registered for the offences under Sections 406, 498A r/w Section 34 of IPC. The first petitioner is the husband of the first informant and the other petitioners are his parents.

2. It is alleged that the petitioners misappropriated the first informant's money and gold ornaments. That apart, demanding more dowry they subjected her to cruelty.

3. The defence version is that the first petitioner filed an application for restitution of conjugal rights and on account of this enmity the first informant got this false case registered.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. In the Family Court, Thiruvalla the first petitioner B.A. No.5075 of 2014 -2- filed O.P.(HMA) No.94/2014 on 07.03.2014 against the first informant for restitution of conjugal rights. They have been married for two years. They have no children. The first informant was working abroad and the first petitioner in Bangalore. After three months of filing of the O.P. in the Family Court, the first informant got this case registered. There is no allegation that any of the petitioners inflicted any serious injury to the first informant. It appears that reconciliation is not impossible. If the petitioners happen to be detained, it may become impossible. Moreover, from the nature of the allegations, I am of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not necessary. In the result, this application is allowed. 1) The petitioners shall be released on bail on their executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum if they are arrested by the Police in connection with this case. 2) They shall appear before the Investigating Officer B.A. No.5075 of 2014 -3- for interrogation if they are so required by him in writing. 3) They shall not destroy or tamper with evidence. 4) They shall not harass the defacto complainant or her relatives. 5) This order is not applicable if the petitioners choose to surrender before the Magistrate concerned and in such case the learned Magistrate may take appropriate action in accordance with the law. Sd/- K. ABRAHAM MATHEW JUDGE //True copy// P.A. TO JUDGE shg/

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial