Kushal Kumar vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Mar 05, 2024

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1310154

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1310154
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mrs. Justice Sophy Thomas
Decided On: Mar 05, 2024
Case Number: Bail Appl./1399/2024

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Kushal Kumar

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....police station, ernakulam, registered under sections 294(b), 323 and 341 read with section 34 of ipc and section 31(1) of dv act.2. the prosecution allegation is that, the petitioner andhis mother, who is the 2nd accused, abused and assaulted the defacto complainant on 12.12.2023 at 8.00 p.m, and the 2 nd accused wrongfully restrained her, and thus both of them violated the protection order issued from grama nyayalaya, vadavucode.3. heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned public prosecutor.4. learned public prosecutor opposed the bail application5. learned counsel for the petitioner would submit thatthe defacto complainant was only a helper, to look after the second accused-mother, who was aged 72 years. the allegations of abuse and assault made by the defacto complainant are absolutely false, and they never violated the protection order issued by the grama nyayalaya.6. the only non bailable offence alleged is undersection 31(1) of the dv act. according to the petitioner, the defacto complainant was only a domestic help to look after the 2nd accused/mother. no criminal antecedents are reported against this petitioner.7. considering the factual situations pleaded by thepetitioner, this court of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required in this case. hence, this court is inclined to allow this petition on the following terms:-(i) the petitioner is directed to surrender before theinvestigating officer on or before 12.03.2024 and subject himself for interrogation. the investigating officer shall interrogate him to collect all materials and evidence relevant for the purpose of(ii) 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.(iii) the petitioner shall appear before theinvestigating officer as and when directed. (iv). the petitioner shall not influence or.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 15TH PHALGUNA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 1399 OF 2024 CRIME NO.1156/2023 OF Puthencruz Police Station, Ernakulam PETITIONER KUSHAL KUMAR AGED 46 YEARS S/O KUNJAN, THRITHALA HOUSE, THIRUVANIYOOR KARA, THIRUVANIYOOR VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU THALUK, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT KAKKATTIL HOUSE, HOUSE NO.4/404, THIRUVANIYOOR PO, ATHANI, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682308 BY ADVS. R.REJI KUMAR P.R.JAYAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 OTHER PRESENT: SR.PP-SRI.RENJIT GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.03.2024, 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, 1973, filed by the 1 st accused in Crime No.1156 of 2023 of Puthencruz Police Station, Ernakulam, registered under Sections 294(b), 323 and 341 read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 31(1) of DV Act.

2. The prosecution allegation is that, the petitioner and

his mother, who is the 2nd accused, abused and assaulted the defacto complainant on 12.12.2023 at 8.00 p.m, and the 2 nd accused wrongfully restrained her, and thus both of them violated the protection order issued from Grama Nyayalaya, Vadavucode.

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 defacto complainant was only a helper, to look after the second accused-mother, who was aged 72 years. The allegations of abuse and assault made by the defacto complainant are absolutely false, and they never violated the protection order issued by the Grama Nyayalaya.

6. The only non bailable offence alleged is under

Section 31(1) of the DV Act. According to the petitioner, the defacto complainant was only a domestic help to look after the 2nd accused/mother. No criminal antecedents are reported against this petitioner.

7. Considering the factual situations pleaded by the

petitioner, this Court of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required in this case. Hence, this Court is inclined to allow this petition on the following terms:-

(i) The petitioner is directed to surrender before the

investigating officer on or before 12.03.2024 and subject himself for interrogation. The investigating officer shall interrogate him to collect all materials and evidence relevant for the purpose of

(ii) 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.

(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the

investigating officer as and when directed. (iv). The petitioner shall not influence or intimidate the witnesses or tamper with the (v). The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. (vi). In case of violation of any of these conditions, the trial court is empowered to cancel his bail, in accordance with law. Sd/- SOPHY THOMAS JUDGE smm

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2024 Same Parties Kushal Kumar vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mrs. Justice Sophy Thomas