Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Vinod Kumar vs State of Kerala

Vinod Kumar vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Apr 30, 2021
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1631978

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Bail Appl./3249/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Vinod Kumar

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....pre-arrest bail.2. the petitioners are the accused nos. 1 to 3 in crime no.103/2021 of the harippad police station. the offences alleged are under sections 498a, 323 and 506(2) r/w section 34 of ipc3. the prosecution case in short is that the defactocomplainant was subjected to cruelty both physically and mentally by the petitioners demanding more dowry and further the petitioners have voluntarily caused hurt on the defacto complainant and thereby committed the offence.4. heard both sides and perused the case diary.5. the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are absolutely innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. he further ..3..submitted that there are no materials to connect the petitioners with the alleged crime and hence they are 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 petitioners and if the petitioners are released on bail at this stage, it would affect the course of investigation.6. the first petitioner is the husband of the defacto complainant. second and third petitioners are the parents ofthe first petitioner. the crime was registered pursuant to a private complaint. considering the allegations levelled against the petitioners, their custodial interrogation does not appear to be necessary. the petitioners have no criminal antecedents. for all these reasons, the petitioners are entitled to pre-arrest bail on conditions.in the result, the application is allowed on the following conditions:-(i) the petitioners shall be released on bail in the event of their arrest on executing a bond for rs.1,00,000/- (rupees ..4.. one lakh only) each 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 petitioners shall fully co-operate with the investigation, including subjecting.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 10TH VAISAKHA, 1943 Bail Appl..No.3249 OF 2021 CRIME NO.103/2021 OF Harippad Police Station , Alappuzha PETITIONER/S: 1 VINOD KUMAR AGED 38 YEARS KIZHAKKATHIL HOUSE, THAMALLACKAL MURI 2 VISWANATHAN AGED 63 YEARS KIZHAKKATHIL HOUSE THAMALLACKAL MURI 3 SUSEELA AGED 58 YEARS KIZHAKKATHIL HOUSE, THAMALLACKAL MURI BY ADV. SRI.JOHN K.GEORGE RESPONDENT/S: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT V SREEJA THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ..2..

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J.

------------------------------------------- B.A.No.3249 of 2021 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of April, 2021

ORDER

This is an application filed u/s 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure seeking pre-arrest bail.

2. The petitioners are the accused Nos. 1 to 3 in Crime No.103/2021 of the Harippad Police Station. The offences alleged are under Sections 498A, 323 and 506(2) r/w Section 34 of IPC

3. The prosecution case in short is that the defacto

complainant was subjected to cruelty both physically and mentally by the petitioners demanding more dowry and further the petitioners have voluntarily caused hurt on the defacto complainant and thereby committed the offence.

4. Heard both sides and perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are absolutely innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further ..3..

submitted that there are no materials to connect the petitioners with the alleged crime and hence they are 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 petitioners and if the petitioners are released on bail at this stage, it would affect the course of investigation.

6. The first petitioner is the husband of the defacto complainant. Second and third petitioners are the parents of

the first petitioner. The crime was registered pursuant to a private complaint. Considering the allegations levelled against the petitioners, their custodial interrogation does not appear to be necessary. The petitioners have no criminal antecedents. For all these reasons, the petitioners are entitled to pre-arrest bail on conditions.

In the result, the application is allowed on the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioners shall be released on bail in the event of their arrest on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees ..4.. One lakh only) each 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 petitioners shall fully co-operate with the investigation, including subjecting themselves to the deemed police custody for the purpose of discovery, if any, as and when demanded.

(iii) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating

officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m on every Saturday until further orders. The petitioners shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required by him.

(iv) The petitioners shall not commit any offence of like nature while on bail.

(v) The petitioners shall not make any attempt to

contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

(vi) The petitioners shall not leave State of Kerala ..5.. without the permission of the trial Court. Sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JUDGE kkj

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial