Anoop vs State of Kerala

ANOOP vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jun 02, 2022

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1444907

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/1444907
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas
Decided On: Jun 02, 2022
Case Number: Bail Appl./608/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

ANOOP

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....is the sole accused in crime no.1359/2021 of pathanapuram police station alleging offences under sections 294(b), 341, 323, 354 r/w34 of ipc.3. the prosecution case is that on 24/12/2021, the accused along with the others used force on the defacto complainant and thereby outraged her modesty.4. sri.s.nithin, the learned counsel for the petitionercontended that the petitioner is totally innocent of the allegation and that incident occurred in a totally different manner. according to the learned counsel, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required and that the offence itself is falsely foisted against the petitioner.5. the learned public prosecutor opposed the grant of bail and submitted that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and that the custodial interrogation is necessary.6. considering the circumstances arising in the case, i am of the view that custodial interrogation is not warranted in the instant case though the offence alleged against the petitioner is serious in nature. therefore, i am inclined to allow this application on the following conditions.(i) in the event of the petitioner being arrested inconnection with crime no.1359/2021 of pathanapuram police station, he shall be released on bail on him executing a bond for rs.50,000/- [rupees fifty thousand only] with two solvent sureties each for the like sum, before the investigating officer.(ii) petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer as and when required.(iii) petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the de facto complainant; nor shall he tamper with the evidence or contact the de facto complainant or her family members.(iv) petitioner shall not commit any offence while he is on bail.(v) the petitioner shall not leave india without thepermission of the court having jurisdiction. (vi)in case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional court shall be empowered to consider the application for.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS THURSDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 12TH JYAISHTA, 1944 PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ANOOP AGED 42 YEARS KOTTAYIL HOUSE, KARAVOOR P.O., , PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT KOLLAM, PIN - 689696 BY ADVS. VISHAK.K.JOHNSON S.NITHIN (ANCHAL) N.P.RUKSANA RESPONDENT: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OTHER PRESENT: SR.PP SRI.NOUSHAD K.A THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
----------------------------------------- B.A.NO. 608 of 2022 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of June, 2022

ORDER

This is an application for anticipatory bail filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

2. Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.1359/2021 of Pathanapuram Police Station alleging offences under Sections 294(b), 341, 323, 354 r/w34 of IPC.

3. The prosecution case is that on 24/12/2021, the accused along with the others used force on the defacto complainant and thereby outraged her modesty.

4. Sri.S.Nithin, the learned counsel for the petitioner

contended that the petitioner is totally innocent of the allegation and that incident occurred in a totally different manner. According to the learned counsel, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required and that the offence itself is falsely foisted against the petitioner.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of bail and submitted that the allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature and that the custodial interrogation is necessary.

6. Considering the circumstances arising in the case, I am of the view that custodial interrogation is not warranted in the instant case though the offence alleged against the petitioner is serious in nature. Therefore, I am inclined to allow this application on the following conditions.

(i) In the event of the petitioner being arrested in

connection with Crime No.1359/2021 of Pathanapuram Police Station, he shall be released on bail on him executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- [Rupees Fifty thousand only] with two solvent sureties each for the like sum, before the Investigating Officer.

(ii) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

(iii) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the de facto complainant; nor shall he tamper with the evidence or contact the de facto complainant or her family members.

(iv) Petitioner shall not commit any offence while he is on bail.

(v) The petitioner shall not leave India without the

permission of the Court having jurisdiction. (vi)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. The bail application is allowed as above. Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE AJM

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2022 Same Parties ANOOP vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas