Janil Kumar vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided May 31, 2021

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1637502

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/1637502
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V
Decided On: May 31, 2021
Case Number: Bail Appl./3699/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Janil Kumar

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....of 2021 2orderthis application seeking pre-arrest bail filed under section 438 of the code of criminal procedure is by the accused in crime no.300 of 2021 of the mala police station registered under sections 341, 506 and 353 of the ipc.2. the de facto complainant is a health supervisor at chc, puthenchira. theprosecution allegation is that on 24.04.2021 at about 9.30 a.m.,the petitioner stood outside the cabin of the defacto complainant and after showering abuses threatened the supervisor. it is alleged that by the acts of the petitioner, the informant was deterred from performing his official duty.3. learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner isinnocent of all allegations. according to the learned counsel the petitioner is a member of the rapid response team and there occurred some exchange of words to regulate the persons who had assembled at the health center. according to the learned counsel, the minor incident was blown up beyond proportion to harass the petitioner.4. the learned public prosecutor has opposed the prayer.5. i have considered the submissions and have carefully evaluated the records.except for some exchange of words, no serious incident had taken place in the center. it is not reported that the petitioner is a person with criminal antecedents. having considered the facts and circumstances, i am of the view that the custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary for an effective investigation in the instant case. in the result, this application will stand allowed. the applicant shall appear before thebail appl. no. 3699 of 2021 3 investigating officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation. thereafter, if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum. the above order shall be subject to the following conditions:i) the petitioner shall cooperate.....

Full Judgment

BAIL APPL. NO. 3699 OF 2021 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V MONDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MAY 2021 / 10TH JYAISHTA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 3699 OF 2021 CRIME NO.300/2021 OF MALA POLICE STATION, THRISSUR PETITIONER/ACCUSED: 1 JANIL KUMAR, AGED 51 YEARS, MADATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE, PUTHENCHIRA DESOM, PUTHENCHIRA VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT THRISSUR, PIN - 680682. BY ADV A.C.DEVY RESPONDENT/S: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031. BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AJITH MURALI THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.05.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BAIL APPL. NO. 3699 OF 2021 2

ORDER

This application seeking pre-arrest bail filed under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is by the accused in Crime No.300 of 2021 of the Mala Police Station registered under Sections 341, 506 and 353 of the IPC.

2. The de facto complainant is a Health Supervisor at CHC, Puthenchira. The

prosecution allegation is that on 24.04.2021 at about 9.30 a.m.,the petitioner stood outside the cabin of the defacto complainant and after showering abuses threatened the supervisor. It is alleged that by the acts of the petitioner, the informant was deterred from performing his official duty.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is

innocent of all allegations. According to the learned counsel the petitioner is a member of the Rapid Response Team and there occurred some exchange of words to regulate the persons who had assembled at the health center. According to the learned counsel, the minor incident was blown up beyond proportion to harass the petitioner.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer.

5. I have considered the submissions and have carefully evaluated the records.

Except for some exchange of words, no serious incident had taken place in the center. It is not reported that the petitioner is a person with criminal antecedents. Having considered the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that the custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary for an effective investigation in the instant case. In the result, this application will stand allowed. The applicant shall appear before the

BAIL APPL. NO. 3699 OF 2021 3 Investigating Officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter, if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum. The above order shall be subject to the following conditions:

i) The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when directed ii) He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer. iii) He shall not commit any similar offence while on bail. In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law. Sd/- RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE NS

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2021 Same Parties Janil Kumar vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V