Kerala High Court
Faisal T M vs Monday on 8 February, 2021
B.A. 8904-2020 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.
MONDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 19TH MAGHA,1942
Bail Appl..No.8904 OF 2020
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 1902/2020 DATED 03-09-2020 OF
DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT, PALAKKAD
CRIME NO.426/2020 OF Chalissery Police Station , Palakkad
PETITIONER:
FAISAL T M
FAISAL T M, AGED 27, SON OF MOHAMMED,
THEKKEVEETTIL HOUSE, ERAVAKKAD, KAPPUR VILLAGE,
PATTAMBI TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT 679552.
AGE AND ADDRESS OF THE PETITIONER WRONGLY
TYPEWRITTEN IN ANNEXURE-4 ORDER AS 20 YEARS, SON OF
RADHAKRISHNAN, MUNDAKKAL HOUSE, KARUMANAKURISSI P
O, CHERPULASSERY, PALAKKAD
679552
BY ADV. SRI.SIRAJ KAROLY
RESPONDENT/STATE AND COMPLAINANT
1
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 031
682031
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CHALISSERY POLICE STATION,
PALAKKADU DISTRICT, PIN 679536,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA,
ERNAKULAM
679536
3 VICTIM
XXXX
XXXX
B.A. 8904-2020 2
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
R3 BY ADV. SMT.PRAMEELA.C.K.
OTHER PRESENT:
AJITH MURALI- P.P
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A. 8904-2020 3
ORDER
Application for pre-arrest bail.
2. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.426 of 2020 of
Chalissery Police Station registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 376, 450 and 506(ii) of Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution allegation is that this petitioner and the defacto
complainant are residing in the very same building. On 4.8.2020 he
trespassed into her house and committed rape on her and thereby
committed the aforesaid offences.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public
Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
allegations levelled against him are absolutely false and baseless. But he
apprehends arrest and hence, this application.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application and
submitted that the defacto complainant is a married lady residing in the very
same building along with her family. The investigation of the case is well in
progress and hence, custodial interrogation is not required to proceed with
the investigation of the case.
7. Having regard to the nature of accusation levelled against this
petitioner by the defacto complainant as well the fact that the custodial
interrogation is not required, this petition for pre-arrest bail can be disposed
of directing the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer at
10.30 a.m on 12.2.2021. Upon his surrender after interrogation he shall be
released on bail on the very same day subject to the following conditions,
after completing all the formalities if any required.
Therefore, this application is allowed subject to the following
conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall be released on bail on executing bond for a
sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent
sureties for the like sum each in the event of arrest by the police in
connection with the above crime.
(ii) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for
interrogation as and when required by him in writing. He shall co-
operate with the investigation of the case.
(iii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly, make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the
facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts
to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail.
In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the learned
Magistrate is empowered to cancel the bail in accordance with the
law.
Sd/-
SHIRCY V.
smm JUDGE
