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.

Vijay Krishna, vs State of Kerala,

Vijay Krishna, vs State of Kerala,

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jan 31, 2024
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1286687

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
Case Number
Bail Appl./453/2024
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

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

Criminal

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Vijay Krishna,

Respondent

State of Kerala,

Excerpt

.....procedure filed by the sole accused in crime no.2985 of 2023 of palarivattom police station, ernakulam, registered under section 376(2)(n) of the indian penal code.2. the prosecution allegation is that, the petitioner committed rape on the defacto complainant on 17.05.2023 on the promise of marriage.3. heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned public prosecutor.4. learned public prosecutor opposed the bail application.5. learned counsel for the petitioner wouldsubmit that, the petitioner is a 27 year old man working as duffedar in additional district and sessions court-i, mavelikkara whereas, the defacto complainant is a married lady aged 47 having a son aged 19. so, the allegation that the petitioner raped the defacto complainant on the promise of marriage is not liable to bebelieved. moreover, the petitioner was on duty before addl.district court, mavelikkara on 17.05.2023, and the alleged incident occurred on that day at ernakulam. that also will speak about the falsity of her allegation. though the alleged incident was on 17.05.2023, the fir was lodged only on 26.12.2023, after the delay of about seven months. for all these reasons, he is seeking a pre-arrest bail.6. learned public prosecutor, on instructions,submitted that the investigation is progressing. considering the factual situations as stated above, this court is of the view that the petitioner can be released on anticipatory bail. in the result, the bail application is allowed as follows:(i) the petitioner shall surrender before the investigating officer on or before 12.02.2024, and subject himself for interrogation.(ii) the investigating officer can collect all materials/evidence relevant for the purpose of investigation from the petitioner.(iii) in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall bereleased 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 arresting officer.(iv) thereafter,.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 11TH MAGHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 453 OF 2024 CRIME NO.2985/2023 OF Palarivattom Police Station, Ernakulam PETITIONER/ACCUSED : VIJAY KRISHNA, AGED 27 YEARS S/O.VIJAYAN.T, COLONY NO.109, MAMPUZHAKARY, RAMANKARY, KUTTANAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 689595 BY ADVS. OMAR SALIM A.N.BIJU P.ABDUL NISHAD ASHISH ABY DAVID AMRITHAMOL A.S. BINTA THERESE JIMMY RESPONDENT/STATE: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, POLICE STATION PALARIVATTOM, PALARIVATTOM, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682025 OTHER PRESENT: PP-SRI.PRASANTH M.P THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed by the sole accused in Crime No.2985 of 2023 of Palarivattom Police Station, Ernakulam, registered under Section 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The prosecution allegation is that, the petitioner committed rape on the defacto complainant on 17.05.2023 on the promise of marriage.

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

4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would

submit that, the petitioner is a 27 year old man working as Duffedar in Additional District and Sessions Court-I, Mavelikkara whereas, the defacto complainant is a married lady aged 47 having a son aged 19. So, the allegation that the petitioner raped the defacto complainant on the promise of marriage is not liable to be

believed. Moreover, the petitioner was on duty before Addl.District Court, Mavelikkara on 17.05.2023, and the alleged incident occurred on that day at Ernakulam. That also will speak about the falsity of her allegation. Though the alleged incident was on 17.05.2023, the FIR was lodged only on 26.12.2023, after the delay of about seven months. For all these reasons, he is seeking a pre-arrest bail.

6. Learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions,

submitted that the investigation is progressing. Considering the factual situations as stated above, this Court is of the view that the petitioner can be released on anticipatory bail. In the result, the bail application is allowed as follows:

(i) The petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer on or before 12.02.2024, and subject himself for interrogation.

(ii) The Investigating Officer can collect all materials/evidence relevant for the purpose of investigation from the petitioner.

(iii) In the event of arrest, 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 arresting officer.

(iv) Thereafter, the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when directed.

(v) The petitioner shall not influence or intimidate the defacto complainant or other witnesses, and shall not tamper with the investigation.

(vi) The petitioner shall not leave the limits of State of Kerala, without getting prior permission from the jurisdictional court.

(vii) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. (viii) In case of violation of these conditions, the Investigating Officer can approach the jurisdictional Magistrate to get his bail cancelled, in accordance with law. Sd/- SOPHY THOMAS JUDGE rkj

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial