Satheesh vs the State of Kerala

Satheesh vs The State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Aug 31, 2021

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1656315

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/1656315
Court: Kerala Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mrs. Justice M.R.Anitha
Decided On: Aug 31, 2021
Case Number: Bail Appl./5598/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Satheesh

Respondent

The State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....rep. by the public prosecutor, high court of kerala at ernakulam - 682031. smt seetha s-public prosecutor this bail application having come up for admission on 31.08.2021, the court on the same day delivered the following:orderdated this the 31st day of august 2021 the petitioner is the sole accused in crime no.356/2021 of aloor police station, pending before thejudicial 1st class magistrate court, chalakudy. it is alleged that the petitioner threatened the defacto complaiant and he had recovered a nude photo of her from the mobile given by the petitioner for a temporary use, and later he had obtained another photo and had sent a copy of the same to the husband of the defacto complainant. it is alleged that he hadshown the same to others also. thereby he committed the offence under section 354(2) and section 66e.2. the learned public prosecutor seriously opposed in considering the petition in view of the nature of offence alleged to have been commited by the petitioner. admittedlythe petitioner and defacto complaiant are neighbours. allegation against the petitioner is that he had sent the nude photo of the defacto complainant to the husband of the defacto complainant. he further claims to be in an affair with defacto complainant. learned public prosecutor denied allthose allegations. investigation is at the preliminary stage. offences against women are in a hike day by day. petitioner moreover is the neighbour of the defacto complainant also. if accused is released on pre-arrest bail there would be every chance of taking such offences lightly and repeating the same. hence, i am of the view that this is not a fit case to grant pre- arrest bail to the petitioner.in the result, the petition is dismissed. sd/- m.r.anitha judge smf //true copy// pa to judge

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA TUESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 9TH BHADRA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 5598 OF 2021 (SEEKING REGULAR BAIL IN CRIME NO.356/2021 OF THE ALOOR POLICE STATION, PENDING BEFORE JFCM NO.I, CHALAKUDY, THRISSUR DISTRICT) PETITIONER/ACCUSED PERSON: SATHEESH AGED 35 YEARS S/O.MOHANAN, VALAYAMKULANGARA HOUSE, THUMBOOR DESOM, KOTTANALLOOR VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680683. BY ADV N.L.BITTO STATE OF KERALA/COMPLAINANT: THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM - 682031. SMT SEETHA S-PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Dated this the 31st day of August 2021 The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.356/2021 of Aloor Police Station, pending before the

Judicial 1st Class Magistrate Court, Chalakudy. It is alleged that the petitioner threatened the defacto complaiant and he had recovered a nude photo of her from the mobile given by the petitioner for a temporary use, and later he had obtained another photo and had sent a copy of the same to the husband of the defacto complainant. It is alleged that he had

shown the same to others also. Thereby he committed the offence under Section 354(2) and Section 66E.

2. The learned Public Prosecutor seriously opposed in considering the petition in view of the nature of offence alleged to have been commited by the petitioner. Admittedly

the petitioner and defacto complaiant are neighbours. Allegation against the petitioner is that he had sent the nude photo of the defacto complainant to the husband of the defacto complainant. He further claims to be in an affair with defacto complainant. Learned Public Prosecutor denied all

those allegations. Investigation is at the preliminary stage. Offences against women are in a hike day by day. Petitioner moreover is the neighbour of the defacto complainant also. If accused is released on pre-arrest bail there would be every chance of taking such offences lightly and repeating the same. Hence, I am of the view that this is not a fit case to grant pre- arrest bail to the petitioner.

In the result, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- M.R.ANITHA JUDGE SMF //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

Same Court & Year Kerala Orders · 2021 Same Parties Satheesh vs The State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mrs. Justice M.R.Anitha