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.

Sunitha S vs State of Kerala

Sunitha S vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Mar 31, 2023
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1335371

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./941/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sunitha S

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....the applicant is the accused in crime no.28/2023 of vanchiyoor police station. the offence alleged is punishable under section 381 of the ipc.3. the prosecution case in short is that the applicant who is a maid servant at the house of the defacto complainant had committed theft of ₹5,000/- and a gold ring weighing half sovereigns.4. heard both sides.5. this court as per order dated 13.3.2023 granted interim bail to the applicant on condition that she shall surrender before the investigating officer and co-operate with the interrogation. thereafter, the public prosecutor submitted that the recovery could not be effected due to the non co-operation of the applicant. hence, this court passed another order on -:3:- 27.3.2023 and directed the applicant to surrender before theinvestigating officer on 29.3.2023 for the purpose of interrogation. a specific direction was given to the applicant to fully co-operate with the investigation including for effecting recovery.6. today, when the case is taken up for hearing, the learned public prosecutor submitted that still the applicant is not co-operating with the interrogation and the recovery is not yeteffected. on the other hand, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that the investigating officer is compelling the applicant to give a confession statement.7. this court has given sufficient time to the investigatingofficer for interrogation. the defacto complainant had given a complaint to the police on the suspicion that the applicant might have committed theft of the gold ornament and the cash. there is a delay of 2 months in preferring the complaint. it is true that the said delay has been explained. however, having considered all the relevant aspects, i am of the view that the applicant can be granted anticipatory bail on the following conditions:- -:4:-(i) the applicant shall be released on bail in the event ofher arrest on executing a bond for rs.1,00,000/- (rupees one lakh only) with two solvent.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH FRIDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 10TH CHAITHRA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 941 OF 2023 PETITIONER/ACCUSED: SUNITHA S, AGED 40 YEARS W/O LATE. RADHAKRISHNAN, PUTHUVAL PUTHEN VEEDU, POOZHANADU, KATTAKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695125 BY ADVS.JOSEPH GEORGE JIBU P THOMAS RESPONDENT/STATE: STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 SRI. M.P. PRASANTH, PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -:2:-

ORDER

Dated this the 31st day of March, 2023 This is an application for anticipatory bail filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

2. The applicant is the accused in Crime No.28/2023 of Vanchiyoor Police Station. The offence alleged is punishable under Section 381 of the IPC.

3. The prosecution case in short is that the applicant who is a maid servant at the house of the defacto complainant had committed theft of ₹5,000/- and a gold ring weighing half sovereigns.

4. Heard both sides.

5. This Court as per order dated 13.3.2023 granted interim bail to the applicant on condition that she shall surrender before the investigating officer and co-operate with the interrogation. Thereafter, the Public Prosecutor submitted that the recovery could not be effected due to the non co-operation of the applicant. Hence, this Court passed another order on -:3:- 27.3.2023 and directed the applicant to surrender before the

investigating officer on 29.3.2023 for the purpose of interrogation. A specific direction was given to the applicant to fully co-operate with the investigation including for effecting recovery.

6. Today, when the case is taken up for hearing, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that still the applicant is not co-operating with the interrogation and the recovery is not yet

effected. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that the investigating officer is compelling the applicant to give a confession statement.

7. This court has given sufficient time to the investigating

officer for interrogation. The defacto complainant had given a complaint to the police on the suspicion that the applicant might have committed theft of the gold ornament and the cash. There is a delay of 2 months in preferring the complaint. It is true that the said delay has been explained. However, having considered all the relevant aspects, I am of the view that the applicant can be granted anticipatory bail on the following conditions:- -:4:-

(i) The applicant shall be released on bail in the event of

her arrest on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer, as the case may be.

(ii) The applicant shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting herself to the deemed police custody for discovery, if any, as and when demanded.

(iii) The applicant shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. every Saturday until further orders. She shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required.

(iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.

(v) The applicant shall not attempt to contact any of the

prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation. -:5:-

(vi) The applicant shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.

(vii) The application, if any, for deletion/modification of bail conditions or cancellation of bail on the grounds of violating the bail conditions shall be filed at the jurisdictional court. Sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE kp

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial