Thursday, 23, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Sachinkumar vs State Of Kerala
2025 Latest Caselaw 9603 Ker

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 9603 Ker
Judgement Date : 13 October, 2025

Kerala High Court

Sachinkumar vs State Of Kerala on 13 October, 2025

                                                        2025:KER:75859

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
 MONDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 / 21ST ASWINA, 1947
                     CRL.A NO. 1544 OF 2025
    CRIME NO.2296/2022 OF KOTTAYAM WEST POLICE STATION,
                             KOTTAYAM
 (CRIME NO.711/2024 OF KOTTAYAM WEST POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM)
 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28.06.2025 IN SC NO.21 OF 2023 OF
                     SESSIONS COURT, KOTTAYAM

APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/ACCUSED:
            SACHINKUMAR,
            AGED 29 YEARS, S/O SALI,
            THEKKECHIRA HOUSE, POONTHARAKAVU, AIMANAM,
            KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686 015.

            BY ADV SRI.JOSEPH T.JOHN

RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
    1       STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
            HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 031.
    2       STATION HOUSE OFFICER.
            KOTTAYAM WEST POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM,
            PIN - 686 003.
    3       APARNA RAJENDRAN,
            AGED 29 YEARS, D/O.RAJENDRAN,
            RESIDING AT KOCHUMUTHEDATHU HOUSE,
            MARYATHURUTHU, P.O. AYMANAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.,
            PIN - 686 017.

            BY ADV SMT. BINDHU.O.V (PP)


     THIS    CRIMINAL   APPEAL    HAVING   BEEN    FINALLY   HEARD    ON
13.10.2025,    THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME      DAY   DELIVERED    THE
FOLLOWING:
                                                2025:KER:75859
CRL.A No.1544/2025
                               2



                         JUDGMENT

This is an appeal filed under Section 14A of the

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act), challenging the order

dated 28-06-2025 in Crl.M.P No.1744/2024 in

S.C.No.21/2023 on the file of the Court of Sessions,

Kottayam, through which the bail granted to the appellant

in Crime No.2296/2022 of Kottayam West Police Station

(which was registered alleging commission of offences

under Sections 498A and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code,

1860 (IPC), Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and

Protection of Children) Act, 2015, and Sections 3(1)(s) and

3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act) has been cancelled.

2. The brief facts are as follows:

The appellant is the sole accused in Crime No.2296/2022

of Kottayam West Police Station, Kottayam district, which

has been registered alleging commission of offences 2025:KER:75859

mentioned above. By order dated 24-03-2023 in

Crl.M.P.No.756/2023 the appellant was granted regular

bail in connection with the case on conditions including

that he shall not influence or threaten any witness or

destroy or tamper with any evidence and that he shall not

get involved in any other crime while on bail. The learned

Public Prosecutor filed an application for cancellation of

bail, alleging that the aforesaid two conditions have been

violated by the appellant. The allegation was on the basis

of the registration of Crime No.711/2024 of Kottayam West

Police Station, Kottayam district, alleging commission of

offences under Sections 452, 506(i) and 323 of the IPC and

Section 3(1) of the Protection of Women from Domestic

Violence Act, 2005. The learned Sessions Judge, by the

impugned order, found that, a perusal of the First

Information Report in Crime No.711/2024 of Kottayam

West Police Station indicates that, on 28-04-2024, at about

7.10 P.M, the appellant criminally trespassed into the

residence of the de facto complainant and threatened to 2025:KER:75859

kill her, twisted her hands, and fisted her stomach. The

learned Sessions Judge found that it is settled law that if

the accused misuses liberty while on bail and indulges in

other criminal activity, the bail is liable to be cancelled.

Accordingly, the bail granted to the appellant was

cancelled by the impugned order dated 28-06-2025.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant

submits that following the order dated 28-06-2025, the

appellant was arrested on 17-08-2025, and he has been in

custody since that date. It is submitted that, as on today,

the appellant has completed 57 days in custody. It is

submitted that the appellant is absolutely innocent of all

the charges leveled against him in respect of Crime

No.711/2024 of Kottayam West Police Station. It is

submitted that the appellant had gone to the house of the

de facto complainant in order to return the custody of the

child, as per Annexure-V mediation agreement (clause-(6)

of Annexure-V mediation agreement). It is submitted that a 2025:KER:75859

false allegation has been unnecessarily raised against him

only to pressurize the appellant to settle other disputes. It

is submitted that the learned Sessions Judge has not

examined the veracity of the allegations and has

mechanically passed the order cancelling the bail granted

to the appellant.

4. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also. The

learned Public Prosecutor points out that the appellant has

criminal antecedents and he is a rowdy history sheeter of

Kottayam West Police Station. It is submitted that the

investigation into Crime No.711/2024 of Kottayam West

Police Station has been completed and a final report has

also been filed. It is submitted that the appellant clearly

violated the conditions on which he was granted bail in the

earlier case and therefore the learned Sessions Judge has

correctly cancelled the bail granted to the appellant. The

learned Public Prosecutor also confirms that notice of this

bail application was served on the de facto complainant.

2025:KER:75859

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant

and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am of the view that

the appellant can be granted bail subject to conditions. It

is true that the appellant faces an allegation of having been

involved in a subsequent offence while on bail in the earlier

case. However, it is seen from Annexure-V, that the

appellant had custody of his child for specified days in a

week, and on the day in question, according to him, he had

gone into the house of the de facto complainant soley to

hand over the custody of the child back to her. When

parties are involved in domestic disputes, the possibility of

a false accusation also cannot be ruled out. Moreover, the

appellant has now been in custody for 57 days after

cancellation of bail. Therefore, I am inclined to allow this

appeal.

7. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed, and the

impugned order dated 28-06-2025 in

Crl.M.P.No.1744/2024 in S.C.No.21/2023 on the file of the 2025:KER:75859

Court of Sessions, Kottayam, will stand set aside. It is

directed that the appellant/accused shall be released on

bail in Crime No.2296/2022 of Kottayam West Police

Station, now pending as S.C.No.21/2023 in the Court of

Sessions, Kottayam, subject to the following conditions:-

i The appellant/accused shall execute a bond

for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty

Thousand only) with two solvent sureties

each for the like sum to the satisfaction of

the jurisdictional court;

ii The appellant/accused shall appear before

the Station House Officer, Kottayam West

Police Station, Kottayam district, as and

when called upon to do so;

iii The appellant/accused shall not intimidate

the de facto complainant and shall not in any

manner act in prejudice to the interests of

the de facto complainant or other family

members of the de facto complainant;

2025:KER:75859

iv The appellant/accused 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;

v The appellant/accused shall not tamper with

any evidence in the case;

vi The appellant shall not commit any offence

while on bail.

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the Station

House Officer, Kottayam West Police Station, Kottayam

district, may apply to the jurisdictional Court for

cancellation of bail.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P. JUDGE ats 2025:KER:75859

APPELLANT'S ANNEXURES

Annexure I A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 07.01.2023.

Annexure II A TRUE COPY OF THE REGULAR BAIL CANCELLATION BY FILING CMP NO 1744/2024 FILED BY THE PROSECUTION DATED 25-5-2025 BEFORE THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT,KOTTAYAM.

Annexure III A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NUMBER 711/2024 DATED 30/4/2024.

Annexure IV A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT FOR THE CRIME NO.711/2024 BEFORE THE KOTTAYAM WEST POLICE STATION DATED 9/5/2024.

Annexure V A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER AND THE MEDIATION AGREEMENT IN MC 8/2023 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT III KOTTAYAM DATED 3/10/2023.

Annexure VI A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 1/5/2024.

Annexure VII A TRUE COPY OF THE DETAIL OBJECTION FOR THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PROSECUTION IN C.M.P.NO.1744/2024 IN S.C.NO.21/2023 BEFORE THE SESSIONS COURT, KOTTAYAM.

Annexure-VIII A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28-6-2025 IN CRL.M.P.NO.1744/2024 IN SC.NO.21/2023 BEFORE THE SESSIONS COURT, KOTTAYAM.

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IDRC

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter