Rejith vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Feb 28, 2019

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1869258

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/1869258
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Sunil Thomas
Decided On: Feb 28, 2019
Case Number: Bail Appl./1272/2019

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Rejith

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....341, 323, 324, 326 read with 34 of ipc. the allegation of the prosecution is that while a 'ganamela' in connection with a temple festival was progressing, petitioner and few other persons started dancing outside the area demarcated for dancing. this was resisted by the brother in law of the de facto complainant, who was a member of the organizing committee. petitioners allegedly manhandled the brother in law of the de facto complainant. on seeing this, victim interfered, whereupon the petitioner allegedly hit on his face with an iron rod. the remaining accused hit, assaulted and when he fell down stamped him. crime was registered and the petitioner apprehending arrest, seeks bail.2. it is seen that the victim hadsustained a nasal bone fracture. evidently, visible injuries were not there, due to the hit on the face. only after getting the head scan done, the nasal bone fracture could be detected. petitioner has no criminal antecedents. considering these facts, i do not feel that a custodial interrogation is essential. hence, i am inclined to grant the benefit of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.accordingly, the bail application is allowed on the following conditions:(i) petitioner shall appear before theinvestigating officer within 10 days from today and shall undergo interrogation. thereafter, if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on bail on he executing a bond for a sum of ₹30,000/- (rupees thirty thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each.(ii) he shall appear before the investigating officer on all thursdays between 9.00 a.m. and 10.00 a.m. for a period of two months from the date of execution of the bond.(iii) he shall not threaten, coerce or intimidate the defacto complainant or the witnesses.(iv) he shall not get involved in any other identical offence and the involvement if any, will be a ground for cancellation of bail. sd/- sunil thomas, judge pn 28/02

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS THURSDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 9TH PHALGUNA, 1940 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMP 759/2019 of SESSIONS COURT, ALAPPUZHA CRIME NO. 92/2019 OF THRIKKUNNAPPUZHA POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA PETITIONER/1st ACCUSED: REJITH AGED 25 YEARS S/O RAJAN, RESIDING AT THAIPARAMBIL HOUSE, PALLIPPATTU MURI, THRIKKUNNNAPPUZHA VILLAGE, KARTHIKAPPALLY TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690515. BY ADV. SRI.K.C.HARISH RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA-682031. 2 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE THRIKKUNAPPUZHA POLICE STATION, THRIKKUNAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, KERALA-690515. PP AJITH MURALI THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

Petitioner is the 1st accused in Crime No.92/2019 of Thrikkunnapuzha Police Station, Alappuzha District for offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 326 read with 34 of IPC. The allegation of the prosecution is that while a 'ganamela' in connection with a temple festival was progressing, petitioner and few other persons started dancing outside the area demarcated for dancing. This was resisted by the brother in law of the de facto complainant, who was a member of the organizing committee. Petitioners allegedly manhandled the brother in law of the de facto complainant. On seeing this, victim interfered, whereupon the petitioner allegedly hit on his face with an iron rod. The remaining accused hit, assaulted and when he fell down stamped him. Crime was registered and the petitioner apprehending arrest, seeks bail.

2. It is seen that the victim had

sustained a nasal bone fracture. Evidently, visible injuries were not there, due to the hit on the face. Only after getting the head scan done, the nasal bone fracture could be detected. Petitioner has no criminal antecedents. Considering these facts, I do not feel that a custodial interrogation is essential. Hence, I am inclined to grant the benefit of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed on the following conditions:

(i) Petitioner shall appear before the

Investigating Officer within 10 days from today and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter, if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on bail on he executing a bond for a sum of ₹30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each.

(ii) He shall appear before the Investigating officer on all Thursdays between 9.00 a.m. and 10.00 a.m. for a period of two months from the date of execution of the bond.

(iii) He shall not threaten, coerce or intimidate the defacto complainant or the witnesses.

(iv) He shall not get involved in any other identical offence and the involvement if any, will be a ground for cancellation of bail. Sd/- SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE Pn 28/02

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2019 Same Parties Rejith vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Sunil Thomas