Diljith vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Sep 01, 2023

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1383490

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/1383490
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath
Decided On: Sep 01, 2023
Case Number: Bail Appl./7184/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Diljith

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....are punishable under sections 452, 341, 323, 294(b), 506 and 354 of the indian penal code.3. the prosecution case, in short, is that on 30.06.2023 atabout 3.00.p.m, the applicant criminally trespassed to the verandah of the residence of the defacto complainant, abused her verbally, caught hold of her hair with intention to outrage her modesty, further voluntarily caused hurt and criminally intimidated her and thereby committed the offences.4. i have heard sri. p.v.vibin, the learned counsel for the applicant and sri. sangeetha raj, the learned public prosecutor. perused the case diary.5. the learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the -:3:-applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. the counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicant with the alleged crime; hence, he is entitled to get bail. the learned public prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicant, and if he is released on bail at this stage, it will affect the course of the investigation.6. the non bailable offences involved are under sections 452and 354 of ipc. the alleged place of the incident is at the verandah of the house of the defacto complainant. i have gone through the fis and statement of the defacto complainant recorded under section 164 of cr.pc. there is noting to attract the ingredients of section 354 of ipc therein. moreover, there is counter case as well. the applicant is a law student and he has no other criminalantecedents. considering the allegations levelled against the applicant, his custodial interrogation does not appear to be necessary. for these reasons, it is a fit case where pre-arrest bail can be granted to the applicant. in the result, the application is allowed on the following -:4:- conditions:-(i) the applicant shall be released on bail in the event of hisarrest on executing a bond for rs.1,00,000/-.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 10TH BHADRA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 7184 OF 2023 CRIME NO.561/2023 OF NJARAKKAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM PETITIONER/ACCUSED: DILJITH AGED 27 YEARS S/O. BABU, KALATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE, PERUMALPADY, ELAMKUNNAPUZHA P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,, PIN - 683503 BY ADV P.V.VIBIN RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, NJARAKKAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683505 SRI.SANGEETHA RAJ N.R [PP] THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.09.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -:2:-

ORDER

Dated this the 1st day of September, 2023 This application is filed u/s 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking pre-arrest bail.

2. The applicant is the accused in Crime No.561/2023 of Njarakkal Police Station, Ernakulam. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 452, 341, 323, 294(b), 506 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 30.06.2023 at

about 3.00.p.m, the applicant criminally trespassed to the verandah of the residence of the defacto complainant, abused her verbally, caught hold of her hair with intention to outrage her modesty, further voluntarily caused hurt and criminally intimidated her and thereby committed the offences.

4. I have heard Sri. P.V.Vibin, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri. Sangeetha Raj, the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the -:3:-

applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicant with the alleged crime; hence, he is entitled to get bail. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicant, and if he is released on bail at this stage, it will affect the course of the investigation.

6. The non bailable offences involved are under Sections 452

and 354 of IPC. The alleged place of the incident is at the verandah of the house of the defacto complainant. I have gone through the FIS and statement of the defacto complainant recorded under Section 164 of Cr.PC. There is noting to attract the ingredients of Section 354 of IPC therein. Moreover, there is counter case as well. The applicant is a law student and he has no other criminal

antecedents. Considering the allegations levelled against the applicant, his custodial interrogation does not appear to be necessary. For these reasons, it is a fit case where pre-arrest bail can be granted to the applicant. In the result, the application is allowed on the following -:4:- conditions:-

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

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 himself 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. He 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.

(vi) The applicant shall not leave the State of Kerala without -:5:- 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 mtk

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2023 Same Parties Diljith vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath