Anil Kumar vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Apr 26, 2022

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1468455

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/1468455
Court: Kerala Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath
Decided On: Apr 26, 2022
Case Number: Bail Appl./2811/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Anil Kumar

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....- 682031 by adv.sri.g.sudheer, public prosecutor this bail application having come up for admission on 26.04.2022, the court on the same day delivered the following:orderdated this the 26th day of april, 2022 this is an application filed u/s 438 of code of criminal procedure seeking pre-arrest bail.2. the petitioner is the accused in crime no.160/2022 of kodanadu police station. the offences alleged are under section 376(2)(n) of ipc.3. the prosecution case in short is that the petitioner had sexually assaulted the victim on several occasions after giving her false promise of marriage.4. heard the learned counsel for the victim and the learned public prosecutor and perused the case diary.5. the learned counsel for the petitionersubmitted that the petitioner is absolutely innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. he further submitted that there are no materials to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime and hence he is entitled to get bail. the learned public prosecutor opposed the bail application. he contended that thealleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the petitioner and if the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, it would affect the course of investigation.6. the law with regard to the grant or refusal ofpre-arrest bail is well settled. pre-arrest bail cannot be granted as a matter of course. the power u/s 438 of cr.p.c could be exercised only when a special case is made out, that too, recording reasons thereof. perusal of the case diary would reveal that the accusation made against the petitioner is well founded. the allegations made against him is very serious in nature and it prima facie show a premeditated criminal act on his part. the investigation is in a preliminary stage. the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary for the purpose of investigation. as rightly argued by the learned public prosecutor, the possibility of the petitioner influencing the witnesses and.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH TUESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 6TH VAISAKHA, 1944 BAIL APPL. NO. 2811 OF 2022 CRIME NO.160/2022 OF KODANADU POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED: 1 ANIL KUMAR AGED 41 YEARS PARACKAL HOUSE, RAYONPURAM.P.O KANJIRAKKADU, PERUMBAVOOR, PIN - 683543 BY ADVS. N.C.MOHANAN C.PAULOSE RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 BY ADV.SRI.G.SUDHEER, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.04.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Dated this the 26th day of April, 2022 This is an application filed u/s 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure seeking pre-arrest bail.

2. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.160/2022 of Kodanadu Police Station. The offences alleged are under Section 376(2)(n) of IPC.

3. The prosecution case in short is that the petitioner had sexually assaulted the victim on several occasions after giving her false promise of marriage.

4. Heard the learned Counsel for the Victim and the learned Public Prosecutor and perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner

submitted that the petitioner is absolutely innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that there are no materials to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime and hence he is entitled to get bail. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. He contended that the

alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the petitioner and if the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, it would affect the course of investigation.

6. The law with regard to the grant or refusal of

pre-arrest bail is well settled. Pre-arrest bail cannot be granted as a matter of course. The power u/s 438 of Cr.P.C could be exercised only when a special case is made out, that too, recording reasons thereof. Perusal of the case diary would reveal that the accusation made against the petitioner is well founded. The allegations made against him is very serious in nature and it prima facie show a premeditated criminal act on his part. The investigation is in a preliminary stage. The custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary for the purpose of investigation. As rightly argued by the learned Public Prosecutor, the possibility of the petitioner influencing the witnesses and interfering with the investigation cannot be ruled out if he is released on bail. Hence, considering the gravity of the offence and stage

of investigation, I feel that it is not a fit case where extra ordinary jurisdiction vested with this Court u/s 438 of Cr.P.C. could be invoked. The application is only to be dismissed. In the result, the bail application is dismissed. Sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE SKP/26.04

Same Court & Year Kerala Orders · 2022 Same Parties Anil Kumar vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath