Kerala High Court
Dr.Madhusoodanan V.V. Aged 41 Years vs State Of Kerala on 1 October, 2014
Author: V.K.Mohanan
Bench: V.K.Mohanan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2014/9TH ASWINA, 1936
Bail Appl..No. 7025 of 2014 ()
------------------------
CRIME NO. 1222/2014 OF PAYYANNUR POLICE STATION , KANNUR
PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:
--------------------------------
1. DR.MADHUSOODANAN V.V. AGED 41 YEARS
S/O. LATE P.V.CHINDAN, ARATHIL NAREEKAMVALLI
P.O.MANDUR, KANNUR-670501.
2. DR. MANOJ KUMAR T.V. AGED 40 YEARS
S/O. SANKARAN T.V., SREEKRISHNA KRIPA
PAYYANNUR-KANNUR-670307.
3. DR.SUNIL P.P. AGED 47 YEARS
S/O. P.P.KUNHAMBU, KANJIRI, KODAKKAT
KASARGOD DISTRICT-670310.
BY ADV. DR.K.P.PRADEEP
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:
---------------------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, OFFICE OF THE ADVOCATE GENERAL
HIGH COURT, KOCHI-682031.
2.PAYYANNUR
REPRESENTEDPS, THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
STATION HOUSEKANNUR
OFFICERDISTRICT
BY
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, OFFICE OF THE ADVOCATE GENERAL
HIGH COURT, KOCHI-682031.
BY DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION SRI. ASIF ALI
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01-10-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
V.K. MOHANAN, J.
----------------------
B.A. No. 7025 of 2014
------------------------
Dated this the 1st day of October, 2014
ORDER
Petitioners, who are accused Nos. 3,1 and 2 respectively, in Crime No. 1222 of 2014 of Payyannur Police Station, preferred this petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., as they apprehend arrest for non-bailable offences in the above crime.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the Ist and 2nd petitioners (accused Nos. 3 and 1) are Gynecologists and the 3rd petitioner who is the the 2nd accused in the above crime, is the Anesthetist attached to Government Taluk Hospital at Payyannur and while they were attending a cesarean section by which a lady by name Sanitha delivered three babies, the petitioners B.A. No. 7025 of 2014 2 directly or indirectly took photographs of the delivery by 11.13 a.m. To 11.16 a.m. on 18-07-2014 and thereafter, the same at their instance, s disseminated in "Whatsapp", social medias and also published in all visual channels. So, according to the prosecution, the petitioners have committed the offences punishable under Sections 354 of IPC and Sections 66E and 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Director General of Prosecution.
4. Sri.Asif Ali, the learned Director General of Prosecution, is fair enough to submit that the prosecution has incorporated Section 354C instead of Sec. 354 and as such the petitioners are facing prosecution for the offence punishable under Sec. 354C and Sections 66E and 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and those offences are bailable offences,
5. The above submission of the learned Director General of Prosecution is recorded. As the offences now alleged against B.A. No. 7025 of 2014 3 the petitioners are bailable offences, according to me, the apprehension of the petitioners that they will be arrested in connection with non-bailable offences are baseless and for that reason alone, this petition under Sec. 438 is not maintainable.
In the result, this petition stands dismissed.
Sd/- V.K. MOHANAN, JUDGE.
Ani/ /truecopy/ P.S.ToJudge