Ajith Kumar, vs Soji,

Ajith Kumar, vs SOJI,

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Mar 01, 2024

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1312102

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/1312102
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice P.G. Ajithkumar
Decided On: Mar 01, 2024
Case Number: Bail Appl./1628/2024

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ajith Kumar,

Respondent

SOJI,

Excerpt

.....the petitioners are the accused in crime no. alleged are punishable under sections 498(a), 323 read with 34 of ipc.3. the prosecution case in brief is as follows: the 1 stpetitioner, being the husband and the 2 nd petitioner, the mother-in-law treated the de facto complainant cruely when the marital relationship was subsisting. it is also alleged that she was subjected to harassment and she was assaulted by the 1st petitioner.4. heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned public prosecutor.5. it is his contention that considering the nature of the offences and the complicity alleged against them, their custodial interrogation is absolutely unnecessary.6. the learned public prosecutor, on the other hand, would contend that the petitioners have actively involved in the commission of the offence and as such, their custodial interrogation is absolutely necessary. therefore, the application is liable only to be dismissed.7. considering the whole circumstances and the materials on record, i am of the view that the petitioners can be granted anticipatory bail on strict conditions.8. in such circumstances, this bail application isallowed and the petitioners are directed to surrender before the investigating officer on or before 14.03.2024. after interrogation and in the event of his being arrested, they shall be released on bail on the execution of a bond for rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand only), with two solvent sureties for the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the investigating officer, and on the following conditions:(i) they shall appear before the investigating officer as and when directed;(ii) they shall not influence or intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence; and(iii) during the bail period, they shall not get involvedin any offence. in case of breach of the bail conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of the bail before the jurisdictional court. sd/-p.g. ajithkumar, judge lsn`

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 11TH PHALGUNA, 1945 CRIME NO.161/2024 OF Anchal Police Station, Kollam PETITIONERS/1ST AND 2ND ACCUSED: 1 AJITH KUMAR, AGED 50 YEARS S/O ANANDAN, AMBALATHIL VEEDU,PANAVELUI, 2 ANANDAVALLI, AGED 82 YEARS W/O ANANDAN, AMBALATHIL VEEDU,PANAVELI, BY ADV AMAL PARTHASARADHY RESPONDENTS/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT: 1 SOJI, AGED 43 YEARS D/O SANTHAKUMARI, SOJU BHAVAN,THEVARTHOTTAM,THADIKKADU P.O, ARAKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM, PIN - 691306 2 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

This is an application for anticipatory bail filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

2. The petitioners are the accused in crime No. alleged are punishable under Sections 498(A), 323 read with 34 of IPC.

3. The prosecution case in brief is as follows: the 1 st

petitioner, being the husband and the 2 nd petitioner, the mother-in-law treated the de facto complainant cruely when the marital relationship was subsisting. It is also alleged that she was subjected to harassment and she was assaulted by the 1st petitioner.

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

5. It is his contention that considering the nature of the offences and the complicity alleged against them, their custodial interrogation is absolutely unnecessary.

6. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, would contend that the petitioners have actively involved in the commission of the offence and as such, their custodial interrogation is absolutely necessary. Therefore, the application is liable only to be dismissed.

7. Considering the whole circumstances and the materials on record, I am of the view that the petitioners can be granted anticipatory bail on strict conditions.

8. In such circumstances, this bail application is

allowed and the petitioners are directed to surrender before the investigating officer on or before 14.03.2024. After interrogation and in the event of his being arrested, they shall be released on bail on the execution of a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only), with two solvent sureties for the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the investigating officer, and on the following conditions:

(i) They shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when directed;

(ii) They shall not influence or intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence; and

(iii) During the bail period, they shall not get involved

in any offence. In case of breach of the bail conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of the bail before the jurisdictional court. Sd/-P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE lsn`

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2024 Same Parties Ajith Kumar, vs SOJI, Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice P.G. Ajithkumar