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.

Noble vs State of Kerala

NOBLE vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jun 08, 2023
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1360598

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./3974/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

NOBLE

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....kollam district, alleging offences under sections 143, 148, 341, 294(b), 323, 326 and 506 of the indian penal code, 1860.3. the prosecution case is that the accused had, on 09.04.2023,on account of a previous enmity, wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant and his friend after abusing and brutally assaulted them and thereafter, the 1st accused hit them with an iron rod and the accused together caused serious injuries on the defacto complainant. the 2nd accused hit him with a beer bottle on his forehead and he sustained a fracture on the right wrist and thereby the accused committed the offences alleged.4. sri. arun babu, the learned counsel for the petitionerscontended that the entire prosecution allegations are false and the incident as alleged had not occurred. it was also submitted that though the incident is alleged to have occurred on 09.04.2023, the fir wasregistered only after one month, that is on 09.05.2023, which itself shows the falsity of the prosecution case. it was further pointed out that crime no. 466/2023, initiated by the petitioners is registered against the defacto complainant in the present case and that this court had allowed anticipatory bail to the accused therein. it was also submitted that considering the entire circumstances of case, petitioners ought to be released on anticipatory bail.5. smt. sreeja, the learned public prosecutor, submitted thatthough the incident is alleged to have occurred on 09.04.2023, the crime was registered only on 09.05.2023. however, since allegations are serious, custodial interrogation of the petitioners are essential.6. the defacto complainant herein is the accused in crime no. bail by this court in ba.no. 3220/2023. the present crime no.the instant case compels this court to release the petitioners on anticipatory bail. however, for the purpose of effective investigation, the petitioners ought to be subjected to interrogation. accordingly, this application is allowed on the following.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 18TH JYAISHTA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 3974 OF 2023 CRIME NO. 613 OF 2023 OF EAST KALLADA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO. 1 & 3: 1 NOBLE S/O YESUDASAN VILANTHARA VALIYAMADAM, EAST KALLADA , KOLLAM, PIN - 691502 2 NIRMAL S/OVICTOR,THUSHARA, ARINALLOOR , THEVALALKKARA , KOLLAM, PIN - 690524 BY ADVS. ARUN BABU SHINE S. RESPONDENTS/STATE - INVESTIGATING OFFICER: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM PIN - 682031 2 INSPECTOR OF POLICE EAST KALLADA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM ., PIN - 691502 OTHER PRESENT: SMT. PP SMT.SREEJA V THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

===================== ====== ================ Dated this the 8th day of June, 2023

ORDER

This is an application seeking pre-arrest bail filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

2. Petitioners are accused Nos. 1 and 3 in Crime No. 613/2023 of East Kallada Police Station, Kollam district, alleging offences under Sections 143, 148, 341, 294(b), 323, 326 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3. The prosecution case is that the accused had, on 09.04.2023,

on account of a previous enmity, wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant and his friend after abusing and brutally assaulted them and thereafter, the 1st accused hit them with an iron rod and the accused together caused serious injuries on the defacto complainant. The 2nd accused hit him with a beer bottle on his forehead and he sustained a fracture on the right wrist and thereby the accused committed the offences alleged.

4. Sri. Arun Babu, the learned counsel for the petitioners

contended that the entire prosecution allegations are false and the incident as alleged had not occurred. It was also submitted that though the incident is alleged to have occurred on 09.04.2023, the FIR was

registered only after one month, that is on 09.05.2023, which itself shows the falsity of the prosecution case. It was further pointed out that Crime No. 466/2023, initiated by the petitioners is registered against the defacto complainant in the present case and that this Court had allowed anticipatory bail to the accused therein. It was also submitted that considering the entire circumstances of case, petitioners ought to be released on anticipatory bail.

5. Smt. Sreeja, the learned Public Prosecutor, submitted that

though the incident is alleged to have occurred on 09.04.2023, the crime was registered only on 09.05.2023. However, since allegations are serious, custodial interrogation of the petitioners are essential.

6. The defacto complainant herein is the accused in Crime No. bail by this Court in BA.No. 3220/2023. The present Crime No.

the instant case compels this court to release the petitioners on anticipatory bail. However, for the purpose of effective investigation, the petitioners ought to be subjected to interrogation. Accordingly, this application is allowed on the following conditions:

(a) Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer on or before 20.06.2023 and shall subject themselves to interrogation between 9.a.m and 3.00 p.m

(b) If after interrogation, the Investigating Officer proposes to

arrest the petitioners, then, they shall be released on bail on them executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum before the Investigating Officer.

(c) Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required and shall also co-operate with the investigation.

(d) Petitioners shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall they tamper with the evidence;

(e) Petitioners shall not commit any other offences while they are on bail.

(f) Petitioners shall not leave India without the permission of the Court having jurisdiction. In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE mtk/08.06.23.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial