High CourtsSingle Bench(2023) 12 KL CK 0240

Bindhumol.P.N vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 26 December 2023

HON’BLE JUDGES
P.G. Ajithkumar, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No.11407 Of 2023

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

12 paragraphs · 453 words

P.G. Ajithkumar, J

1.

This is an application for anticipatory bail filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

2.

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1315 of 2023 of Peringome Police Station, Kannur. He had allegedly committed the offences punishable under Sections 341, 324, 326 and 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3.

The prosecution allegation is that at about 2.00 p.m. on 11.12.2023, while the petitioner was sitting inside her Textile shop, out of the vengeance that the de facto complainant came there and demanded back the money owed to her, caught hold of her neck and slapped her face. The petitioner further kicked the de facto complainant using the handle of a scissors at her left leg, head and shoulder causing her grievous injuries. The petitioner abused the de facto complainant as well.

4.

The petitioner would contend that she has not involved in the alleged crime and without any material or evidence, she was implicated in the crime. It was the de facto complainant, who assaulted the petitioner.

5.

On the instructions from the Sub inspector of Police, Peringome Police Station, the learned Public Prosecutor objected the grant of bail to the petitioner.

6.

Having heard the learned counsel on both sides and considered the nature of the offence, I am of the view that the detention of the petitioner during the period of investigation is not necessary in this case. From the materials on record, particularly, Annexure 3 it is seen that the incident was more in the nature of an altercation. It is not able to say at this stage as to whether the petitioner had triggered the incident and is the perpetrator. In the nature of the allegations against the petitioner, I am of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner during investigation is not absolutely necessary in this case.

In the result, the bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to surrender before the investigating officer within two weeks. After interrogation and necessary process of investigation, including recovery, if any, if her being arrested, she shall be released on bail on the execution of a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only), with two solvent sureties for the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the investigating officer, and on the following conditions:

(i) She shall not influence or intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence;

(ii) She shall appear before the investigating officer as and when called for; and

(iii) During the bail period, she shall not get involved in any offence.

In case of breach of the bail conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of the bail before the jurisdictional court.