Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Kerala
  4. /
  5. 2014
  6. /
  7. January

Mahil Kumar

High Court Of Kerala|23 December, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. 2. The 1st petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.2091 of 2014 of Pathanamthitta Police station registered for the offences under Secs.451, 427, 323 & 354 read with Sec.34 of Indian Penal Code. The 2nd petitioner is not an accused. The petitioners are officers of a financial institution. It is alleged that they wrongfully confined the defacto complainant, uttered obscene words, assaulted her and outraged her modesty. 3.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations are false.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the defacto complainant and the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. It appears that there was a loan transaction between the financial institution and the defacto complainant. Proceedings are pending before the DRT. The allegation is that the 1st petitioner and others who are officers of the financial institution assaulted the victim and outraged her modesty. The facts of the case indicate that this is essentially an assault case. It is doubtful whether Sec.354(B) IPC is attracted. The apprehension of the 2nd petitioner who allegedly was present at the place of occurrence does not appear to have any foundation. So, I am inclined to grant the prayer of the 1st petitioner, but not of the 2nd petitioner.
In the result this application is allowed.
(i) The 1st petitioner shall be released on bail after interrogation on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum if he is arrested by the Police in connection with this case.
(ii) The 1st petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.30 a.m. and 11.30 a.m. on every 1st and 3rd Fridays for three months or till final report is filed, whichever is earlier.
(iii) The 1st petitioner shall not commit any offence while he is on bail nor shall he tamper with the evidence.
(iv) If the 1st petitioner violates any of the above conditions, the Court of enquiry/trial is empowered to cancel the bail in accordance with the law.
(v) The application is dismissed so far as the 2nd petitioner is concerned.
Sd/-
K. ABRAHAM MATHEW JUDGE / True Copy / NS P.A. To Judge
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Mahil Kumar

Court

High Court Of Kerala

JudgmentDate
23 December, 2014
Judges
  • K Abraham Mathew
Advocates
  • P Haridas Smt
  • Sri