Farook K vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided May 26, 2021

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1615302

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/1615302
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice B.Sudheendra Kumar
Decided On: May 26, 2021
Case Number: Bail Appl./2443/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Farook K

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....the learned public prosecutor, on instructions, has -3- submitted that the 1st accused alone had committed rape and that the petitioner had neither committed the rape noraided the 1st accused in committing the rape. it was revealed in the investigation that the petitioner had only beaten the informant prior to the commencement of the pooja by the 1st accused. the learned public prosecutor has no serious objection in granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. it has been submitted by the learned public prosecutor that the petitioner is not involved in any other offence of similar nature. considering the facts and circumstances of the case, i am inclined to grant the relief under section 438 cr.p.c. in favour of the petitioner. in the result, this application stands allowed and the petitioner shall be enlarged on bail, in the event of his arrest in connection with the above said crime on condition -4-of the petitioner executing a bond for rs.50,000/-(rupees fifty thousand only), with two solvent sureties, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the station house officer concerned, before whom the petitioner shall surrender within twenty days, if not arrested in the meantime and subject to the following conditions:(i) the petitioner shall report before the investigating officer as and when required by the investigating officer for interrogation.(ii) the petitioner shall not get involved in any other offence of similar nature during the pendency of this case.(iii) the petitioner shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses or in any way tamper with the investigation. sd b. sudheendra kumar, judge. dl/

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MAY 2021 / 5TH JYAISHTA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 2443 OF 2021 CRIME NO.1351/2020 OF Chevayur Police Station, Kozhikode PETITIONER/S: FAROOK K AGED 31 YEARS SON OF ABDUYL AZEES KAKKATTIL NARUKARA ERANAD TALUK MALAPPURAM MALAPPURAM, PIN - 673507 BY ADV T.SHIHABUDHEEN RESPONDENT/S: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,SMT M K PUSHPALATHA THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.05.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -2-

ORDER

The petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No.1351 of 2020 of Chevayur Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 354, 420 and 376 read with Section 34 IPC.

2. The prosecution allegation is that the 1 st accused

received a total amount of Rs.6,00,000/- from the informant and his family during December 2020 under the guise of ejecting the devil from the body of the wife of the informant and thereafter, he committed rape on her. It is alleged that the petitioner outraged her modesty.

3. The petitioner has filed this application praying for the relief under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

4. Heard.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, has -3- submitted that the 1st accused alone had committed rape and that the petitioner had neither committed the rape nor

aided the 1st accused in committing the rape. It was revealed in the investigation that the petitioner had only beaten the informant prior to the commencement of the pooja by the 1st accused. The learned Public Prosecutor has no serious objection in granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. It has been submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner is not involved in any other offence of similar nature. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant the relief under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner. In the result, this application stands allowed and the petitioner shall be enlarged on bail, in the event of his arrest in connection with the above said crime on condition -4-

of the petitioner executing a bond for Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand only), with two solvent sureties, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer concerned, before whom the petitioner shall surrender within twenty days, if not arrested in the meantime and subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer as and when required by the Investigating Officer for interrogation.

(ii) The petitioner shall not get involved in any other offence of similar nature during the pendency of this case.

(iii) The petitioner shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses or in any way tamper with the investigation. SD B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, JUDGE. dl/

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2021 Same Parties Farook K vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice B.Sudheendra Kumar