Sandhya vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Apr 25, 2023

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1355886

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/1355886
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice P.G. Ajithkumar
Decided On: Apr 25, 2023
Case Number: Bail Appl./3092/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sandhya

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 of the indian penal code, 1860.3. the allegations based on which the crime wasregistered are the petitioner who is the proprietor of a concern name ‘habitat constructions’ falsely affixed the signature of the defacto complainant and her designation seal in the papers submitted before the cherthala panchayath for obtaining building permit. thereby the petitioners committed the aforementioned offences.4. heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned public prosecutor.5. the learned counsel appearing for the petitionerwould submit that the petitioner has been engaging the defacto complainant for certifying building plans and application for permit to be submitted before the local self government for the last several years and now she filed a complaint before the police without any reason. further, the allegations levelled against the petitioner would not amount to the criminal offences as alleged.6. the facts constituting the allegations levelled against the petitioner who is a woman are borne byrecords. the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary for the furtherance of the investigation. the petitioner and the defacto complainant are persons known to each other and therefore there is no question of any mistaken identity also.taking into account all such matters, the application is disposed of directing the applicant to surrender before the investigating officer within a period of one week from today. in the event of his surrendering before the investigating officer, she shall, after interrogation and necessary other formalities of investigation, be produced before the magistrate having jurisdiction within the time specified in section 57 of the code. if any bail application is filed by the petitioner, on such production, the learned magistrate shall dispose of the same, as far as possible, on the same day. sd/- p.g. ajithkumar judgespr appendixpetitioner’s annexures:- annexure - a1 the true.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL 2023 / 5TH VAISAKHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 3092 OF 2023 CRIME NO.246/2023 OF Arthungal Police Station, Alappuzha AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CRL.MP 1332/2023 OF DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT, ALAPPUZHA PETITIONER/ACCUSED: SANDHYA AGED 49 YEARS W/O. SATHEESAN, PERAYIL HOUSE, CHERUVARANAM, WARD NO. IV, KANJIKUZHI PANCHAYAT, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688 555. BY ADVS. JOY GEORGE PRAICY JOSEPH TANYA JOY GEORGE BRISTON ANIMMA JOSEPH RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 031. 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER ARTHUNKAL POLICE STATION ARTHUNKAL, ALAPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 688 555. SRI. P.G MANU - PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.04.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
P.G. AJITHKUMAR, J.
------------------------------- B.A.No.3092 of 2023 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of April, 2023

ORDER

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

2. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.246 of 2023 of Arthungal Police Station. The offences alleged is under Sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3. The allegations based on which the Crime was

registered are the petitioner who is the proprietor of a concern name ‘Habitat Constructions’ falsely affixed the signature of the defacto complainant and her designation seal in the papers submitted before the Cherthala Panchayath for obtaining building permit. Thereby the petitioners committed the aforementioned offences.

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

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

would submit that the petitioner has been engaging the defacto complainant for certifying building plans and application for permit to be submitted before the Local Self Government for the last several years and now she filed a complaint before the police without any reason. Further, the allegations levelled against the petitioner would not amount to the criminal offences as alleged.

6. The facts constituting the allegations levelled against the petitioner who is a woman are borne by

records. The custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary for the furtherance of the investigation. The petitioner and the defacto complainant are persons known to each other and therefore there is no question of any mistaken identity also.

Taking into account all such matters, the application is disposed of directing the applicant to surrender before the investigating officer within a period of one week from today. In the event of his surrendering before the investigating officer, she shall, after interrogation and necessary other formalities of investigation, be produced before the Magistrate having jurisdiction within the time specified in Section 57 of the Code. If any bail application is filed by the petitioner, on such production, the learned Magistrate shall dispose of the same, as far as possible, on the same day. Sd/- P.G. AJITHKUMAR JUDGE

SPR APPENDIX

PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES:- ANNEXURE - A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR DATED 22.03.2023 OF ARTHUNKAL POLICE STATION IN CRIME NO. 246/23. ANNEXURE - A2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FI STATEMENT OF THE DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT DATED 22.03.2023. ANNEXURE - A3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03.04.2023 IN CRL.M.P. NO. COURT, ALAPPUZHA. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL.

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2023 Same Parties Sandhya vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice P.G. Ajithkumar