Kerala High Court
Suresh Kumar vs Nil
Author: S.S.Satheesachandran
Bench: S.S.Satheesachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN
MONDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JULY 2012/8TH SRAVANA 1934
Crl.MC.No. 2334 of 2012 (B)
--------------------------
IN CRMP.1978/2012 of SESSIONS COURT,KOTTAYAM
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
SURESH KUMAR,
S/O.GOVINDAN NARI, PUTHUPALLIYIL HOUSE,
VADAKKENIRAPPU, KATAMPACKKU KARA, NJEEZHOOR VILLAGE,
KOTTAYAM.
BY ADV. SRI.GOKUL DAS V.V.H.
COMPLAINANT(S):
---------------
CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
KADUTHURUTHY POLICE STATION,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT R REMA
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
30-07-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
LSN
Crl.MC.No. 2334 of 2012 (B)
ANNEXURE
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURE:
ANNEX I- COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27.04.2012 IN CRL.M.P. NO. 1379/2012
BEFORE THE SESSIONS COURT, KOTTAYAM.
ANNX I- COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18.06.2012 IN CRL.M.P. NO. 1978/2012
BEFORE THE SESSIONS COURT, KOTTAYAM.
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURE: NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
LSN
S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN,J.
---------------------------------------
Crl. M.C. NO. 2334 of 2012
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 30th day of July, 2012
O R D E R
Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.246/2012 of Kaduthuruty Police station. He is being proceeded with for offences under Sections 450, 376, 386 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code, Section 119(B) of the Kerala Police Act and Section 66(E) of the Information Technology Act. Investigation of that crime is in progress. The accusation is that he administered some Ayurvedic medicine to the de facto complainant made her unconscious and then ravished her. He, then, is alleged to have taken some photographs of that woman, and, later, threatened her using such photographs is the further allegation. After his arrest and incarceration for a few days, he was enlarged on bail imposing certain conditions. Annexure-I is the order passed by the Sessions Judge releasing him on bail. Among the conditions imposed he was restrained from entering into the village where he and also the de facto complainant resided. Another condition imposed was directing his presence before the Investigating Crl. M.C. NO. 2334 of 2012 2 officer once in a week, on the day and time fixed, till the completion of the investigation. Petitioner, later, moved an application before the Sessions Judge for modification of the above two conditions. That application was dismissed vide Annexure - II order. Petitioner has therefore filed the above petition for modification of the bail conditions referred to invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He has filed an affidavit stating that the house of the de facto complainant is situated 2 km away from his residence and in view of his continuous absence his ailing mother and school going children and put to severe hardship and injury. He is prepared to abide by any condition as may be imposed for modification of the two conditions referred to, is the further averment in his affidavit.
2. The learned Public Prosecutor after getting instructions reports that the house of the de facto complainant is situate hardly 1km away and it may not be advisable to modify the condition imposed, at this stage, having regard the nature of the offences imputed against the petitioner. However, it is Crl. M.C. NO. 2334 of 2012 3 further submitted that the investigation of the crime is almost complete and report will be filed shortly.
3. The learned Sessions Judge has declined the request of the petitioner for modification of the bail conditions imposed with a one line order stating that no reason is made out to lift the conditions considering the nature of the case. Petitioner has not produced copy of the petition filed before the Sessions Judge to examine whether he had set forth sufficient grounds, and if so what are the grounds urged for modification of the conditions imposed.
Be that as it may, having regard the fact that the investigation is practically over, I find, condition No.3 imposed in Annexure-I order directing the petitioner to report before the Investigating officer need be continued only for 2 more weeks from today or till the investigation is completed whichever is later. So far as the modification of condition No.2 under Annexure-I restraining the petitioner from entering into Njeezhoor village, taking note that the investigation is practically over, there will be a direction that he can move an application Crl. M.C. NO. 2334 of 2012 4 afresh before the Sessions Judge stating the grounds which entitle him to seek modification of that condition. In case any such application is moved within a period of two weeks from today irrespective of the order passed under Annexure -II, the learned Sessions Judge shall consider such application on its merits and pass appropriate orders thereof. In case any modification of condition No.2 is made it shall be ensured with appropriate direction that the presence of petitioner in Njeezhoor village will not cause any threat or harm to the de facto complainant nor affect a fair trial of the case in any manner.
Subject to the above direction/observation the petition is disposed of.
S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE LSN