SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ratheesh vs State Of Kerala on 5 November, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANNIE JOHN

TUESDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 14TH KARTHIKA,
1941

Bail Appl.No.7675 OF 2019

CRIME NO.1043/2019 OF Thenmala Police Station, Kollam

PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED 1 TO 4 6 :

1 RATHEESH,
AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.KRISHNAN, KRISHNAVILASOM,
VENTURE ESTATE, ARYANKAVU VILLAGE,
KOLLAM DISTRICT.

2 MANIKANTAN,
AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.PARAMASIVAN, VENTURE
ESTATE, ARYANKAVU VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

3 SANKAR,
AGED 30 YEARS,
S/O.DHARMAR, PULIVILA VEEDU,
VENTURE ESTATE, ARYANKAVU VILLAGE,
KOLLAM DISTRICT.

4 MUKESH,
AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.MURUKAN, VENTURE ESTATE,
ARYANKAVU VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

5 AJIN T.,
AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.THULASI, THANNIMMOOTTIL
VEEDU, VENTURE ESTATE, ARYANKAVU VILLAGE,
KOLLAM DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.P.ANOOP (MULAVANA)

RESPONDENT :

STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM -682 031.

BY SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.B.JAYASURYA

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl.No.7675 OF 2019

2

ORDER

The petitioners herein are accused Nos.1 to 4 6

in Crime No.1043/2019 of Thenmala Police Station, Kollam

District registered for offences under Sections 341, 294 (b),

323, 354 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The prosecution allegation is that on

11.09.2019, at 17.15 hours, the petitioners had an altercation

with the son in law of the de facto complainant and thereafter

the petitioners 4 and 5 caught hold of him and the petitioners

1 to 3 attacked. When the de facto complainant tried to

prevent the same, the petitioners 1 and 3 abused her and

pulled her down and thereafter kicked the son-in-law of the

de facto complainant.

3. In fact the petitioners had an altercation with

the son in law of he petitioner with regard to opening of the

door of the car. At the same time, the de facto complainant
Bail Appl.No.7675 OF 2019

3

was not even there on the spot. Later, she filed false

complaint against the petitioners that she was attacked. The

date of occurrence of the incident is 11.09.2019 and the date

of registering of crime is 18.10.2019 i.e.after 37 days.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor has strongly

opposed the application by stating that there are serious

allegations against the petitioners. He has produced the

statement of the de facto complainant and in that it was

stated that she is not intended to proceed with the case. But

since there is threat on the part of the petitioners, she has

given complaint against the petitioners. Moreover, the 5 th

petitioner had already arrested and was released on bail. In

fact the main offence is under Section 354 IPC. The only

allegation is that the petitioners assaulted the de facto

complainant. But that will not be sufficient to attract Section

354 IPC. Other offences are bailable offences. Therefore, I
Bail Appl.No.7675 OF 2019

4

am inclined to grant anticipatory bail, as prayed for.

In the result, this application is allowed and the

Station House Officer, Thenmala Police Station shall enlarge

the petitioner on bail, in the event of his arrest on execution

of a bond for Rs.50,000/- each with two solvent sureties each

for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer,

subject to the following conditions :

1. The petitioners shall appear before the SHO,

Thenmala Police Station as and when required.

2. The petitioners shall not involve in any offence

while on bail.

3. The petitioners shall not influence the

witnesses or tamper any evidence in this case.

4. If the petitioners violate any of the above

conditions, the bail granted to them, by this Court shall stand

cancelled, forthwith.

Sd/-

ANNIE JOHN, JUDGE
RKM

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation