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.

Farhab vs State of Kerala

Farhab vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Jun 26, 2023
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1368273

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 Orders High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Bail Appl./4876/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Farhab

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....is the accused in crime no.570/2023 of tirur police station. the offences alleged against the petitioner are under sections 342 and 376d of ipc.2. the prosecution case is that, on 26.04.2023 at about 7 p.m.,the accused committed rape of the defacto complainant while the petitioner was undergoing a massage in an ayurvedic treatment centre where the victim was working as a staff. in connection with the investigation of the said case, the petitioner was arrested on 27.04.2023, and since then, he has been under judicial detention. this application for regular bail is submitted in such circumstances.3. heard sri.p.m. manoj, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and sri.c.s. hrithwik, learned public prosecutor for the state.4. the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that thepetitioner is innocent of all the allegations. according to him, he was falsely implicated in this case consequent to certain disputes between the defacto complainant and the 2nd accused, who is the manager of the said ayurvedic treatment centre. it was pointed out that after theregistration of the crime, the dispute between the 2 nd accused and the defacto complainant was settled, consequent to which bail was granted to the 2nd accused based on an affidavit submitted by the defacto complainant. the learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and shall abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this court.5. the learned public prosecutor, on the other hand, would oppose the aforesaid application. it is pointed out that it is a clear caseof rape, and the materials indicate the same. the petitioner had committed the rape of the defacto complainant while undergoing massage in the ayrvedic treatment centre. however, it is submitted that the investigation, in this case, is over, and the final report has been submitted before the jurisdictional court.6. i have gone through the records. the statement of the victimwas.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. MONDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 5TH ASHADHA, 1945 CRIME NO.570/2023 OF TIRUR POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1: FARHAB AGED 35 YEARS S/O MAJEED, KADAVANDI PURAKKAL HOUSE, PUTHIYA KADAPPURAM, TANUR POST, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 676302 BY ADVS. P.M.MANOJ P.ANTO THOMAS HAMZATH ALI V.K. RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT: STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM THROUGH INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TIRUR POLICE STATION, PIN - 682031 BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ADV C S HRITHWIK - SR PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.570/2023 of Tirur Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 342 and 376D of IPC.

2. The prosecution case is that, on 26.04.2023 at about 7 p.m.,

the accused committed rape of the defacto complainant while the petitioner was undergoing a massage in an Ayurvedic Treatment Centre where the victim was working as a staff. In connection with the investigation of the said case, the petitioner was arrested on 27.04.2023, and since then, he has been under judicial detention. This application for regular bail is submitted in such circumstances.

3. Heard Sri.P.M. Manoj, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.C.S. Hrithwik, learned Public Prosecutor for the State.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner is innocent of all the allegations. According to him, he was falsely implicated in this case consequent to certain disputes between the defacto complainant and the 2nd accused, who is the Manager of the said Ayurvedic Treatment Centre. It was pointed out that after the

registration of the crime, the dispute between the 2 nd accused and the defacto complainant was settled, consequent to which bail was granted to the 2nd accused based on an affidavit submitted by the defacto complainant. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and shall abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, would oppose the aforesaid application. It is pointed out that it is a clear case

of rape, and the materials indicate the same. The petitioner had committed the rape of the defacto complainant while undergoing massage in the ayrvedic treatment centre. However, it is submitted that the investigation, in this case, is over, and the final report has been submitted before the jurisdictional court.

6. I have gone through the records. The statement of the victim

was made available by the learned Public Prosecutor for perusal. When going through the contents of the same, it can be seen that it contains all the ingredients to make out a prima facie case of rape. The allegations are very serious. When going through the contents of the aforesaid

statement, I do not find any justifiable reason to accept the contention put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioner with regard to the false implication of the said case. Even though it is pointed out that the 2nd accused was released on bail based on the affidavit submitted by the victim, from the materials placed before me, I am of the view that the said aspect cannot have any relevance as far as the prayer sought by the petitioner is concerned. The allegation of sexual assault is specifically made against the petitioner, and the allegation against the 2 nd accused is to facilitate the said sexual assault. Therefore, the gravity of the allegations against the 2nd accused is different, and hence I do not find it necessary to consider the release of the 2nd accused on bail.

Thus, after taking note of all the relevant aspects, I do not find any justifiable reasons to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE scs

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial