Naveen, vs the State of Kerala

Naveen, vs The State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided May 27, 2021

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1633675

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/1633675
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Sunil Thomas
Decided On: May 27, 2021
Case Number: CRL.A/300/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Naveen,

Respondent

The State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....no.31 of 2021 of the perumbadappu police station for offences punishable under sections 366, 376(i) of the indian penal code and section 3(2)(v) of the sc/st (poa) amendment act.2. the crux of the prosecution allegation is that, on23.03.2019 at about 9.30a.m., petitioner after promising to marry the defacto complainant who belongs to sc community, committed rape of her in april 2019. thereafter, he failed to marry her. on the basis of the complaint laid, crime was registered and in the course of investigation, accused was arrested on 22.02.2021 and is in custody since then. he filed crl.m.p.no.230 of 2021 seeking bail which was dismissed by the impugned order.3. when the matter was taken up, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the statutory period of 90 days has expired and to his information, final report has not beenlaid. learned government pleader was directed to get specific instructions as to whether chargesheet has been laid within the statutory time. learned government pleader, on instructions, today submitted that, he has been informed that final report has not been laid even now. respondent no.2 has not been served inspite of service upon her.4. having considered the fact that final report has not been filed on time, petitioner is entitled for statutory bail. even otherwise on facts, i feel that, petitioner is entitled for bail at this point of time. petitioner shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions.(i) petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court.(ii) he shall appear before the investigating officer as and when called for.(iii) he shall not threaten, coerce or intimidate the de facto complainant nor shall he interfere in the process of investigation. criminal appeal is allowed as above. sd/- sunil thomas judge sbna/

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS THURSDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MAY 2021 / 6TH JYAISHTA, 1943 CRL.A NO. 300 OF 2021 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGEMENT IN CRMP 230/2021 OF SPECIAL COURT (ATROCITIES AGAINST SC/ST), MANJERI, MALAPPURAM
APPELLANT/PETITIONER/ACCUSED: NAVEEN, AGED 22 YEARS S/O. SUNDARAN, KURUPPAM VEETTIL, PURATHUR P.O, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV K.RAKESH RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/STATE & VICTIM: 1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI PIN 682 031 2 XXX VICTIM OTHER PRESENT: PP E.C BINEESH THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.05.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.31 of 2021 of the Perumbadappu Police Station for offences punishable under sections 366, 376(I) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (POA) Amendment Act.

2. The crux of the prosecution allegation is that, on

23.03.2019 at about 9.30a.m., petitioner after promising to marry the defacto complainant who belongs to SC community, committed rape of her in April 2019. Thereafter, he failed to marry her. On the basis of the complaint laid, crime was registered and in the course of investigation, accused was arrested on 22.02.2021 and is in custody since then. He filed Crl.M.P.No.230 of 2021 seeking bail which was dismissed by the impugned order.

3. When the matter was taken up, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the statutory period of 90 days has expired and to his information, final report has not been

laid. Learned Government Pleader was directed to get specific instructions as to whether chargesheet has been laid within the statutory time. Learned Government Pleader, on instructions, today submitted that, he has been informed that final report has not been laid even now. Respondent No.2 has not been served inspite of service upon her.

4. Having considered the fact that final report has not been filed on time, petitioner is entitled for statutory bail. Even otherwise on facts, I feel that, petitioner is entitled for bail at this point of time. Petitioner shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions.

(i) Petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

(ii) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for.

(iii) He shall not threaten, coerce or intimidate the de facto complainant nor shall he interfere in the process of investigation. Criminal appeal is allowed as above. Sd/- SUNIL THOMAS JUDGE Sbna/

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2021 Same Parties Naveen, vs The State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Sunil Thomas