High CourtsSingle Bench

Sreenadh vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 15 September 2022 · Citation: (2022) 09 KL CK 0065

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bechu Kurian Thomas, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 308, 323, 324, 341, 354, 451,498A
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 6725 Of 2022
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

14 paragraphs · 431 words

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J

1.

This is an application for regular bail filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

2.

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.712 of 2022 of Paravoor Police Station, Kollam District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 451, 341, 323, 324, 354 and 308 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3.

The prosecution case is that, the defacto complainant, who is the wife of the accused, was subjected to severe cruelty and on 11.08.2022, the accused attempted to strangle the defacto complainant using a shawl, and due to the intervention of a co-worker of the defacto complainant, she escaped and thus the accused had committed the offences alleged.

4.

Sri.M.R.Sarin, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the entire prosecution allegations are false and that the incident as alleged had never occurred. In any event, it was submitted that, the petitioner was arrested on 11.08.2022 and that the continued detention of the petitioner is not warranted.

5.

Smt.M.K.Pushpalatha, the learned Public Prosecutor, opposed the grant of bail and submitted that the petitioner is alleged to have committed a serious offence, and that, had it not been for the intervention of a co-worker of the defacto complainant, she could have been killed.

6.

A perusal of the case diary reveals that prima facie there are materials on record to connect the petitioner with the crime. However, since petitioner was remanded to judicial custody on 11.08.2022, I am of the view that the continued detention of the petitioner is not required in the circumstances of the case. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.

7.

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

(a) Petitioner shall be released on bail on him executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction.

(b) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

(c) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence or contact the victim or her family members.

(d) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is on bail.

(e) Petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the Court having jurisdiction.

8.

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, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.