Kerala High Court
Ramalakshmi. K vs State Of Kerala on 9 October, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
2025:KER:75023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 / 17TH ASWINA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 12147 OF 2025
CRIME NO.1131/2025 OF NEMOM POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED
01.09.2025 IN CRMC NO.2389 OF 2025 OF DISTRICT COURT &
SESSIONS COURT/ RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
PETITIONER:
RAMALAKSHMI. K.,
AGED 40 YEARS,
D/O. KALIMUTHU, NARAYANEEYAM, PUTHUKUDI VEEDU,
SANTHIVILA, NEMOM.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695 020.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN
SMT.N.P.ASHA
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA.,
REPRESENTED BY BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 682 031.
SMT. SREEJA V., PP
Bail Appl. No.12147 of 2025
2025:KER:75023
-2-
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.10.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl. No.12147 of 2025
2025:KER:75023
-3-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS., J
-------------------------------------
Bail Appl. No.12147 of 2025
------------------------------------
Dated this the 9th day of October, 2025
ORDER
This bail application is filed under section 482 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS').
2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1131 of 2025 of
Nemom Police Station, Thiruvananthpuram, registered for the offences
punishable under sections 296(b), 115(2) and 118(1) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS').
3. According to the prosecution, between 03.08.2025 and
04.08.2025, accused assaulted the de facto complainant using a chair
kept in the kitchen and thereby committed the offences alleged.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the
learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
petitioner has been falsely arrayed as an accused and that he has no
involvement in the alleged crime
6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application
and submitted that his custodial interrogation is necessary.
7. Petitioner is the daughter-in-law of the de facto
2025:KER:75023
complainant. There are pending cases under the Protection of Women
from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. Petitioner resides in the
matrimonial house sharing the residence, pursuant to an order of
protection issued in M.C.No.34 of 2025 on the files of Judicial First
Class Magistrate Court-VII, Neyyatthinkara, produced as Annexure-II.
Though the de facto complainant is aged 92 years, it is noticed that the
injuries allegedly sustained by the de facto complainant are only two
abrasions. Of course, there is a reference to the accused squeezing the
genitals of the de facto complainant, however, no corresponding injury
is seen. Notwithstanding the above, taking note of the close
relationship between the parties and the existing dispute between them,
I am of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not
necessary.
8. In Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020 (5)
SCC 1, it was held that, while considering whether to grant anticipatory
bail or not, Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such
as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the
applicant, and the facts of the case. Grant of anticipatory bail is a
matter of discretion and the kind of conditions to be imposed or not to
be imposed are all dependent on facts of each case, and subject to the
discretion of the court.
9. Taking note of the entire circumstances, I am of the view
that petitioner can be protected with an order of pre-arrest bail subject
2025:KER:75023
to conditions.
Accordingly, this application is allowed on the following
conditions:
(a) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on
21.10.2025 and shall subject himself to interrogation.
(b) If after interrogation, the Investigating Officer proposes to
arrest the petitioner, then, he shall be released on bail on him
executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only)
with two solvent sureties each for the like sum before the
Investigating Officer.
(c) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as
and when required and shall also co-operate with the
investigation.
(d) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the
witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence.
(e) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is
on bail.
In case of violation of any of the above conditions or if any
modification or deletion of the conditions are required, the jurisdictional
Court shall be empowered to consider such applications, if any, and
pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, notwithstanding the
bail having been granted by this Court.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
ADS
2025:KER:75023
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 12147/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure-I A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME
NO.1131/2025 OF NEMOM POLICE STATION.
Annexure-II A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 26.04.2025
PASSED BY JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE
COURT-VII, NEYYATTINKARA.
Annexure-III A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.07.2025
IN IA NO. 1/2025 IN OP NO.911/2025 PASSED
BY FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
Annexure-IV A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27.05.2025
PASSED BY FAMILY COURT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
Annexure-V A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.
1132/2025 OF NEMOM POLICE STATION.
Annexure-VI A TRUE COPY OF THE TREATMENT RECORDS OF
THE PETITIONER.
Annexure-VII A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
07.08.2025 BEFORE THE SUPERINTENDENT OF
POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
Annexure-VIII CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
01.09.2025 IN CRL MC NO. 2389/2025 PASSED
BY COURT OF SESSIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
