SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Vyshak.B vs The State Of Kerala on 26 September, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 / 4TH ASWINA, 1941

Bail Appl..No.6380 OF 2019

CRIME NO.428/2019 OF KOTTIYAM POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT

PETITIONERS:

1 VYSHAK.B, AGED 25 YEARS
VAISAKHAM, KOTTIYAM, ADICHANALLOOR, KOLLAM.

2 BENNY.P., VAISAKHAM, KOTTIYAM,
ADICHANALLOOR, KOLLAM.

3 MINI MOL, VAISAKHAM, KOTTIYAM,
ADICHANALLOOR, KOLLAM.

BY ADVS.
SRI.T.R.RAJAN
SRI.R.JOHNSON

RESPONDENTS:

1 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, THE HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
KOTTIYAM POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

BY SRI.AMJAD ALI, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.09.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.6380 of 2019
2

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

B.A.No.6380 of 2019

Dated this the 26th day of September, 2019

ORDER

Petitioners herein have been arrayed as accused Nos.1 to 3 in

Annexure-A1 Crime No.428/2019 of Kottiyam Police Station, Kollam,

which has been registered for offences punishable under Secs.498A and 34Section

of the Indian Penal Code, on the basis of the FI Statement given by the lady

de facto complainant on 18.06.2019, in respect of the alleged incident

which happened for the period from 05.02.2018 to 18.06.2019.

2. The lady de facto complainant in this case is the wife of the

1st petitioner (A-1). The 2nd and 3rd petitioners herein (A-2 and A-3) are the

father and mother of the 1st petitioner (A-1).

3. The learned Public Prosecutor would submit on the basis of

instructions that now the investigation has been fully completed and the

final report/charge sheet has already been filed and that since the

investigation has been completed in its entirety and the matter is now

pending before the competent criminal court concerned and that therefore,

the investigating agency does not require the arrest or custodial
B.A.No.6380 of 2019
3

interrogation of the petitioners and that on receipt of the summons from

the competent criminal court concerned, after taking cognizance, it is for

the petitioners concerned to appear before court concerned and secure bail.

Hence, it is urged by the learned Prosecutor that the apprehension of the

petitioners that they will be arrested and detained by the Investigating

Officer in connection with the above investigation, is without any factual

foundation, as the investigation itself has been completed.

4. Accordingly, it is for the petitioners concerned to work out their

remedies, in the manner known to law. With the said liberty, the above

application stands disposed of.

Sd/-

ALEXANDER THOMAS
JUDGE
vgd

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