Rajeev vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Nov 28, 2022

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1576283

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/1576283
Court: Kerala Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas
Decided On: Nov 28, 2022
Case Number: Bail Appl./9236/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Rajeev

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....in crime no.1147/2022 of chithara police station, kollam, alleging offences punishable under sections 447, 294(b), 324 and 326 r/w section 34 of the indian penal code.3. according to the prosecution, the accused trespassed into thehouse of the defacto complainant and after abusing his wife beat her with a wooden rod and thereafter assaulted the defacto complainant who suffered two fractures on his nasal bone and thereby committed the offences alleged.4. sri.s.r.sreejith, the learned counsel for the petitionercontended that the prosecution allegations are false and the incident as alleged had not occurred. it was further submitted that petitioner had an infection of an implant on his leg, as a result of which he could not have even moved around on the date of incident. in support of the said contention, petitioner relied upon annexure a certificate issued by the medical college hospital, thiruvananthapuram. it was also submitted that petitioner is willing to abide by any condition that may be imposed.5. sri.noushad k.a., the learned public prosecutor opposed thegrant of bail and contended that the incident is alleged to have occurred on 26.10.2022 while the contention regarding infection of the implant is dated 29.10.2022, which obviously could only be a subsequent event. it was further submitted that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is essential since the defacto complainant had sustained grievous hurt.6. i have considered the rival contentions and have perused the documents produced. the alleged infection of the implant is noticed to have been certified on 29.10.2022 while the incident is alleged to haveoccurred on 26.10.2022. since the injuries inflicted on the defacto complainant are serious and the defacto complainant had sustained two fractures, i am of the view that this is not a fit case where the petitioner would be protected with an anticipatory bail. accordingly, i dismiss this application. however, if the petitioner surrenders before the.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944 CRIME NO.1147/2022 OF CHITHARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM PETITIONER/ ACCUSED (A1) : RAJEEV, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O SUSHAMMA, RESIDING AT R.R. HOUSE, KILITHATTU, CHITHARA, KOLLAM, PIN - 691 559 BY ADV S.R.SREEJITH RESPONDENT/ STATE : STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 031 BY SRI.NOUSHAD K.A., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- B.A.No.9236 of 2022 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 28th day of November, 2022

ORDER

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

2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1147/2022 of Chithara Police Station, Kollam, alleging offences punishable under Sections 447, 294(b), 324 and 326 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. According to the prosecution, the accused trespassed into the

house of the defacto complainant and after abusing his wife beat her with a wooden rod and thereafter assaulted the defacto complainant who suffered two fractures on his nasal bone and thereby committed the offences alleged.

4. Sri.S.R.Sreejith, the learned counsel for the petitioner

contended that the prosecution allegations are false and the incident as alleged had not occurred. It was further submitted that petitioner had an infection of an implant on his leg, as a result of which he could not have even moved around on the date of incident. In support of the said contention, petitioner relied upon Annexure A certificate issued by the Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram. It was also submitted that petitioner is willing to abide by any condition that may be imposed.

5. Sri.Noushad K.A., the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the

grant of bail and contended that the incident is alleged to have occurred on 26.10.2022 while the contention regarding infection of the implant is dated 29.10.2022, which obviously could only be a subsequent event. It was further submitted that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is essential since the defacto complainant had sustained grievous hurt.

6. I have considered the rival contentions and have perused the documents produced. The alleged infection of the implant is noticed to have been certified on 29.10.2022 while the incident is alleged to have

occurred on 26.10.2022. Since the injuries inflicted on the defacto complainant are serious and the defacto complainant had sustained two fractures, I am of the view that this is not a fit case where the petitioner would be protected with an anticipatory bail. Accordingly, I dismiss this application. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the Investigation Officer on or before 05.12.2022 he shall be subjected to interrogation. Thereafter in case he is arrested, he shall be produced before the learned Magistrate without further delay. In the event of any application for bail being filed, the same shall also be considered, in accordance with law. The bail application is dismissed. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE RKM

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